Who knows?

Her communication was a little cloudy, and her selection of Friday afternoon before the 4th appears intended to bury the story.

She seemed to invoke Alaska's best interests, her family's best interests, but said nothing specific in reference to any future political aspirations.

Those who held her in contempt and disrespect will not stop doing so.
Those who admire her will not stop doing so.
And that covers about 99% of Americans.

Paul Begala of CNN quoted Hunter Thompson, "When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro." After listening to her rambling speech, I am inclined to agree.

Removing herself from office so she won't be a distraction I don't think will change if she considers a run for any other office. I think the distractions will remain for quite some time. Obvioiusly, I haven't walked in her shoes, but I would have thought sticking it out as governor would have helped her.

angusj:

Just curious how you know that Sarah Palin doesn't have the IQ to be president. What is the IQ number one needs to be president and have you seen the results of her IQ test?

I am not trying to be funny here. I would be curious to know how you know this. One of the things that disturbs me is that some people on both sides of the political aisle tend to judge the intelligence of a politician on whether or not they agree with their politics.

Don't get me wrong. Sarah Palin was not ready for primetime when it came to running for vice-president. She was not familiar with importaint matters, particularly foreign policy. And her folksy populist posture at times irritated me. But there is a big difference between someone needing to bone up on the issues and not being able to comprehend such issues.

I am just curious as to how you know she is not able to get it.

Allan (#7,#8) asks: "Just curious how you know that Sarah Palin doesn't have the IQ to be president."

Hi Allan. I would suggest her poor judgment in accepting McCain's invitation to be his running mate before being even close to being ready for that responsibility is good evidence of that.

Allan,

Refer to the final 3 lines of my post #1. The first of those 3 lines should answer the question you have asked.

don't think my grandchildren and their children will think Barack Obama had a high IQ either as they live in poverty to pay off the trillions of dollars of USAmerican debt. He may have a higher IQ than Sarah Palin, but he doesn't use it wisely IMHO.

John (#13), let's be fair though...our grandchildren were already on the hook for a ton of debt thanks to tax cuts and the wars. questionable management and all this debt didn't begin with the current administration.

There are different kinds of intelligence. In terms of academic intelligence, many historians say Woodrow Wilson and Jimmy Carter were the greatest in 20th Century but their administrations weren't that great. Clinton seemed to have tremendous IQ on tactics; Reagan on strategy. Being academically (or policy wonkish) smart isn't the most important thing.

Every innovator is an idiot until his/her idea succeeds ... then he/she is a genius. I think the jury is still out on Palin. Is she an insightful tactician or just impulsive? I wouldn't be too quick to write her off but she would not be my pick for president today.

Are we sure that John Frye posted that comment? it seems a little out of character for a blogger to get their own address wrong.

And speaking of typos, let's try "pseudo-John."

I'm so sorry I'm always out of the mainstream, but
it's true,and I've been swimming so long against the
flow you get weary. Do you know that there are things
that are true but if you say them you get crucified by
the media. Since no one here has said this, I must.
America has been spirally downward for so long it is sad.

The political know that Sarah Palin's strongest
support come from what they call "evangelicals".
Ronald Reagon, the Bushes, and Sarah Palin have
all been "stupid" in the media. What is the reason for this?
The Republicans knew they were going to lose in 2008,
because the coalition with "evangelicals" was over.
Sarah Palin was their attempt to hang on.

I hope Sarah Palin starts a third party movement. It
must be founded on some truths that have not been
formalized in prior movements. It can't be Whig, green, or
Neo this or that. Yes, there must be intelligence
on current issues- budget, healthcare, energy at home
and trade and military use abroad. And I would like
to see fresh ideas on these issues, and that will
be important. You see fresh ideas at Jesus Creed
on these issues, but not much elsewhere. For example,
Doctors and hospitals having to publish fees upfront.
Sarah Palin is smarter than most on energy. A great
bi-partner issue would be budget. Militarily wouldn't
it be great to see our people stay home- if we can't
take care of the problem covertly or in the air or
sea, let's get off others soil. Trade is a problem
that few of us even talk about, but we should air
out new approaches, and this is a missional topic.

But the major point is Palin starting a third party
movement. It wouldn't and couldn't be a secret that
her base would be "evangelicals". So the separation
of church and state will be hammered at her and the
party by media. The left in this country really believe
they have the church issue under control and they
are probably correct. So this issue of the new party
being a pseudo-Christian cover-up will be real. So on
what truths must it be founded. Honestly, every
party stands on the Constitution and the Bill of Rights,
whether they follow through consistently or not. In America
today, the answer seems to be a grassroots one. It is
about us taking control again of the system, because
this country looks and feels like one that our forefathers
fought to get rid of.

Sarah Palin is important because she could start a
movement that might not pay dividends in 4 or 8
years, but will do away with the 2 party system in the
future. Whether this is good or bad we will only know
later, but we the people have to stand and try.