Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

Latest Palin Controvery Just a Subset of War Over Direction of GOP


Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin (R) arrives at a GOP congressional fundraiser on June 8 in Washington. (Manuel Balce Ceneta/Associated Press)

By Dan Balz
The Palin wars have erupted again inside the Republican Party. Leaks followed by trash-talking followed by recriminations.

The latest eruption began in Vanity Fair, with a lengthy article by Todd Purdum examining the Alaska governor's past and future. The controversy migrated instantly to the web and the blogs--it was, in fact, made for the viral communication of today's politics--and became even more intense, nasty and personal. Jonathan Martin provided the fullest account for Politico.

There are several elements to this controversy. One is over Palin and her fitness as a possible presidential candidate in 2012. The pretext is her suitability to have been John McCain's vice presidential nominee, but the real issue is the sharp division within the Republican Party over where she goes from here.

Another element of the controversy is the future of the party itself. How much must the GOP adapt and change to assure its vitality as a healthy alternative to the Democrats? Palin is only a proxy in this larger debate that is consuming many Republican strategists and elected officials.

Finally there is the after-action war over John McCain's failed presidential campaign that still rages among a handful of GOP insiders. To those who were on the inside, there was virtually no way for McCain to defeat Obama in a year when George W. Bush's approval rating was below 30 percent, when more than eight in 10 Americans thought the country was off track. To those on the outside, McCain's defeat may have been likely, but their view was aided by mismanagement and poor strategy atop the campaign.

The criticism of Palin in Vanity Fair, and the strong reaction by Palin defenders, echoed the breakdown that occurred at the end of the campaign. Never has there been such a moment of internecine warfare just as a losing candidate is exiting the stage as there was in the days following Obama's victory last November.

For several days, the two camps fired at one another at the expense of both Palin and McCain. The charges and countercharges aimed at Palin were, to many Republicans, shocking and inexcusable, a messy end to a dispiriting campaign. Would that it would have ended there. Instead the Palin controversy has become a staple of the Republican story in the months since.

There's no surprise that Palin remains a controversial figure with the public at large. Her performance in the campaign created a wide gulf in public opinion between those who found her fresh and appealing and those who found her shallow and unready. What has been surprising is the degree to which she has divided Republicans--at least Republican strategists, insiders and talking heads--and how virulent their disagreements have become.

This was that foundation upon which the latest exchanges have taken place, with William Kristol of the Weekly Standard and Steve Schmidt, who was one of McCain's top advisers, carrying on a public argument over whether Schmidt had privately criticized Palin in the Vanity Fair piece and whose credibility should most be called into question.

The exchanges were vicious, if perhaps of interest to a small community of GOP insiders. But they continue to keep alive the debate over Palin. She is, in the estimation of many Republicans and even some Democrats, the most charismatic Republican in the country. But she also has generated a small cadre of detractors inside the party who question her capacity and her judgment, particularly as a possible 2012 candidate.

Beyond Palin, however, is the question of whither the GOP. Schmidt caused a stir earlier this spring when he publicly urged the party to rethink its position on gay marriage. He argued that in a nation that is both more diverse and more tolerant, Republicans must not appear to be rigid in their judgments of how people live their lives.

Other Republican strategists who don't necessarily agree with Schmidt on that particular question nonetheless see the GOP as a shrinking enclave. They see a party that has lost its footing among moderates and independents in need of a major overhaul. They worry that, given present demographic trends, the party must modernize, as the British Conservative Party has done, or risk a long-term period in exile.

Others within the GOP family believe that a combination of a return to first principles, the addition of some fresh faces who can attractively repackage a conservative agenda and a few stumbles by President Obama will help start the GOP comeback.

They remember what happened after Bill Clinton won the White House and how Republicans hunkered down, created a wall of resistance to Clinton's agenda (particularly health care) and successfully stoked the anti-government sentiment around the country. The result was the landslide of 1994 that drove Democrats from power in Congress.

All of this comes together in the persona of Sarah Palin. She is an irresistible personality around whom the arguments about the Republican future will continue to swirl. Some of this is truly about Palin past and future, but the noise also symbolizes deeper arguments about a party attempting to regroup under difficult circumstances.

By Post Editor  |  July 1, 2009; 12:49 PM ET
Categories:  B_Blog , Dan Balz's Take  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: What Franken's Win Does and Doesn't Mean
Next: No Recent Videos from Palin

Comments

gratianus, I nearly went off the deep end when you called Sarah Palin an 'overachiever'. Wahooo!

Let's see: was it 5 or 6 schools until she got a degree from the prestigious University of Idaho local campus she went to? Was it getting pregnant before she got married? Was it about being runner-up in a beauty pageant in Alaska? Overachiever, I think not. Unscrupulous political operative with a serious lack of grasp of the truth and reality is more like it.

Posted by: BobfromLI | July 5, 2009 3:13 PM | Report abuse

In his ambition to be president, McCain abandoned almost everything that made him so admirable. That he would have to reign in his independent streak and his famous candor to be the party's nominee was no surprise. In resurrecting a dead campaign he chose to bring in the Rovians and allowed them to turn him into a commodity. His honor, integrity, and patriotism became both a sales pitch and a shield. That he had sold his soul became crystal clear when he chose Sarah Palin as his running mate. How could she possibly have passed muster with McCain if he was concerned with the safety and security of United States? That she lacked the aptitude to be Commander in Chief was painfully obvious after being reduced to uttering gibberish in response to predictable questions from a posturing anchorman on a taped TV show. Follow-up performances showed it wasn't just an off moment for her. The old McCain would have dismissed her then and there, but the Rovians prevailed.

It's utterly mystifying and a little frightening to me that in the wake of the catastrophic Bush years so many Americans are still so vulnerable to the politics of fear that they would cast a vote for what would have been the oldest man to ever have assumed the presidency and his staggeringly under-qualified choice to take command at a moment's notice of the world's mightiest military and the world's largest economy.

I hope this ends her plans to run for the presidency.

I hope Americans, and Republicans in particular, stop being afraid of everything. Why are we afraid of al-Qaeda? Let there be a hundred 9/11's and to hell with them. Terrorists win if you stay terrified. Among the most egregious failures of George W. Bush was the failure to learn this simple truth and to refrain from using, or allowing others to use on his behalf, the tragedy of 9/11 to become a symbol of fear used again and again as the singular best reason to go along with his policies, his wars, and his re-election.

Posted by: 6is9 | July 5, 2009 12:28 AM | Report abuse

Palin is to be feared. Think about how George Bush impossibly got 8 years in the White House. The wealthy neocon wing of the Republican party will pour hundreds of millions into a Palin campaign. The fact that she is lazy and knows nothing about everything is a dream come true for them. She can delegate all decisions to her neocon handlers, like Bush did, and run us into the ground for eternity. Mark my words, if you vote Palin, you are voting for the neocons to take control of the US again. They are a powerful group not to be underestimated. They have lots of money and can bring her to the WH.

Posted by: rhicks1 | July 3, 2009 4:47 PM | Report abuse

The only people supporting Palin are the pro-choice right wing that think her retarded baby alone qualifies her for President.

Posted by: rhicks1 | July 3, 2009 4:41 PM | Report abuse

Obama is sinking quickly in the polls. Many who voted for him will not do so again. His far left loony economic policies will bleed taxpayers dry. Obamas banana republic economics will quadruple the deficit this year. He will lose the 2012 election. I would suggest that Democrats should worry about their own party and forget about Sarah Palin.
Incidentally there is no criticism of gaffe a day Biden

Posted by: jbba22 | July 2, 2009 9:29 PM | Report abuse

Why no mention of the Post's connection to Kristol?

Balz made a significant error in leaving this out, considering how important Kristol is to the story. This would be like describing Bob Woodward only as "a best selling author" or for that matter only describing Norman Chad as a guy with a bad haircut who announces poker games.

If someone gets paid by the Post, that needs to be mentioned any time that person is quoted by the Post. That's basic journalism, and leaving it out needs a followup.

Strangely, the Post also neglects to mention Kristol's connection in Howard Kurtz's Media Notes.

Posted by: jurrtterwqgeorge | July 2, 2009 9:19 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: J242 | July 2, 2009 6:56 PM | Report abuse

For any and all Pailin supporters, please view the following article on her involvement in the AIP (Alaskan Independence Party) as well as watch the video she made for their keynote address. She supports succession from the USA! That is wholly un-American and you all need to pull your head's out of each other's rear orifices and see the light of day regarding this and more importantly, her in general.

Posted by: J242 | July 2, 2009 6:55 PM | Report abuse

Forget all the finger-pointing and story leaking, and just compare Sarah Palin's performance in a typical interview to that of, say, Mike Huckabee. Palin sometimes seemed uncomfortable and defensive. Huckabee was usually at ease. You don't have to like or trust the media to be able to use the media, and Huckabee, I think, understands that better than Palin.

Posted by: mobs7 | July 2, 2009 2:59 PM | Report abuse

Sarah Palin is a polarizing figure. With beauty queen looks and significant smarts, she was enjoying a 90% approval rating as governor when McCain showed up in August of 2008 to tap her as his VP selection. Within weeks, McCain was taking public swipes at her, and in the ensuing month leading up to the election she was brutalized in the media. McCain ended up the looser, and there are many who want to be sure that Palin goes down with him. The reality is more complex, as she is still a potentially powerful political force for the Republicans.

Here is a nice piece on the current flap:

http://www.newsy.com/videos/vanity_fair_on_palin_what_s_it_all_mean

Posted by: storycipher | July 2, 2009 1:48 PM | Report abuse

Hey JakeD, I really, really hope your party nominates Miss Bird Brain Palin for 2012. I am still waiting for her to do Meet The Press. Has she ever said anything that did not include "also"? Barack Obama has been president for 6 months, and his waking days have been filled with cleaning up the mess idiot george left us after 8 years of his inept regime. If you think your party has a prayer in 2012, you are deluded. No matter how painful the cleaning up of our country would be, president Obama will get his 2nd term because rational Americans can appreciate the mess idiot george left him. Finally JakeD please tell your party leaders to keep insulting the hispanics.

Posted by: Henry_of_BrowardCounty | July 2, 2009 1:05 PM | Report abuse

Forget about us libs. You think someday the faithful are going to realize that half the *conservatives* who know Sarah Palin despise her? There's an article on it above, for instance, but that doesn't seem to be sinking in on you guys yet.

So hey, go ahead, promote her all you guys want. Send her lots and lots of money. Every liberal I know is thrilled by the notion. It's as though we decided to run Sharpton for president. As the saying goes, "when your enemy is making a fool of himself, get out of his way."

Posted by: nodebris | July 2, 2009 1:17 AM | Report abuse

"If conservative bloggers and pundits did the same to Hillary Clinton . . . "

Oh, that's good. If you need proof that conservatives live in a hermetically sealed no-reflection zone of unintentional self-mockery, you can start with that quote above. Really. He can't imagine conservative bloggers and pundits mistreating Hillary Clinton. Too rich.

Posted by: nodebris | July 2, 2009 1:11 AM | Report abuse

To "jmsmaxwell":

If you'd like to be taken seriously, or have your obvious candidate of choice taken seriously, you may want to learn to spell proper english before posting further. ("It is truley amazing", "non-baised pundips", "rock star Oblable and his groupe minions", " political savy than the commuity organizer", "Her minister hasn't cursed Amrica", etc...)

You are an example of how the majority who lack a proper education vote Republican in this country. All the more reason to oppose their party. You use slander against the sitting president when there has been ZERO controversy (Other than made-up delusions about his citizenship of course) involved with the sitting president yet you create false "issues" every chance you get. Get over it all ready. America (Capital A mind you) is evolving, becoming more educated (Thanks to rapid-fire news updates brought to us by technology, the result of many educated minds) and as such, your "island unto yourself" opinions are proving more and more antiquated and obsolete by the millisecond.

As someone who has had to work with Sarah Palin in the past and is currently an Alaskan state resident I can tell you first hand that she is not in ANY position to be "leading" anything larger than a school district PTA meeting. She is mean-spirited, vindictive, short-sighted and worst of all, uneducated on the issues she speaks out on. She needs to stay in Anchorage where she can't do as much harm instead of the national spotlight where she will inevitably cause more harm than good.
For good examples about her laughable "leadership" I would encourage any and all to look into the Mat-Maid dairy, Wasilla Ice rink/pavillion, Gravina island, Wasilla Wal-Mart and current wolf extermination fiascos.

As for her minister, he may not have cursed America (Neither did Obama's he was speaking metaphorically referring to America's policies under Bush and how they were damning America but it's obvious that just went over your head as subtext isn't your strong suit) however her minister DID invite a murderer into his church and had him bless Palin on stage. The same murderer who (In a fit of fear) decried an African billager as a witch and a heretic then had her hunted and murdered to appease his Christian fellowship. Sorry but I'd rather have a pastor exorcise his first amendment rights of free speech (even though the uneducated masses like yourself won't understand his point or even his basic words) then have a pastor who actively encourages the slaughter of those who disagree with him.

Posted by: J242 | July 2, 2009 12:39 AM | Report abuse

Conservative values aren't enough to make Sarah Palin a good pilot, a gifted surgeon, a concert pianist or an effective president.

Personal values are not the same as competence, talent and skill.

Oddly though, conservatives tend to view this as an either/or proposition.

I guess that means you're either competent or you're a conservative.

Posted by: JohnQuimby | July 1, 2009 10:32 PM | Report abuse

1: Palin is a loser. Why the GOP is trying to salvage her is beyond me. Even if this all was a hatchet job by the left and the media, so what? They clearly succeeded. Let's be realistic and move on. And by "move on", I don't mean "move on to Mitt Romney".

2: Alaska should secede. They'd be much better off.

3: Gary Johnson in 2012.

Posted by: Tank2 | July 1, 2009 9:54 PM | Report abuse

malis:

Now I see the problem. You are confusing me with someone who posted anything you included within the parenthesis. No wonder you couldn't quote me.

Posted by: JakeD | July 1, 2009 9:42 PM | Report abuse

Palin has one thing going for her in that she's a fresh face. But is that enough? Hardly.

She needs to spend more time proving she can grow and learn and so far, she's doing the exact opposite.

Intellect has never been a GOP strong suit so she's doing what Reagan and Bush did. She's dumbing down the party even further and hoping it'll be enough to get her elected.

A fresh face has to have something behind the face...and she'll never get there because her supporters don't have the courage to tell her the truth. She and her supporters need to grow up.

Posted by: zzpat | July 1, 2009 9:33 PM | Report abuse

JakeD said “I am still waiting for you to post even one quote of mine that you feel is "irrational" (as I am more than willing to explain why you are mistaken).” Were I as non-serious as you, I’d say something flippant like “We’re still waiting for something that demonstrates the least bit of rationality.”

But just as a quick nomination, your irrationality is certainly demonstrated by your repeated rote repetition of anti-Obama fantasies (Not a Citizen! Muslim! Murder!) parroted from fringe websites, anonymous emails, and AM talk radio.

So, when you have something to say based on actual, verifiable evidence instead of Magical Thinking (‘itmustbetrueitmustbetrueitmustbetrue’), perhaps we could have a nice talk some time.

Posted by: malis | July 1, 2009 9:21 PM | Report abuse

Sarah Palin is a tool. She appeals to emotionally conservative people who are not very well educated or particularly bright.

The *real* base of the republican party is people worth $100M or more, but since they are a small minority, they need carismatic floksy people to trick the masses into voting for people who will reliably give them tax breaks. Sarah Palin and "Joe the Plumber" fit that bill perfectly.

Joe the Plumber and Rush Limbaugh are just blow-hards.... they are like the drunk at the end of the bar who says "I'll tell you what I would do if I was president..." They might be entertaining, but no sane person would give either of them the job.

Sarah Palin is exactly the same. Only difference is she doesn't realize it.

If she is ever elected "president" we'll have no idea who is really in charge...

Posted by: rwolf01 | July 1, 2009 9:17 PM | Report abuse

…and I see we have another Wacky Acolyte, jmsmaxwell (notice how his screed fits so nicely into the list I identified previously?).

Max, I considered it great progress that the R’s allowed a woman VP—wouldn't even have been possible not that long ago. My first impression of Sarah Barracuda was very favorable…I liked her, perhaps because of the things we have in common. We were both born in Northern Idaho with the same kind of outdoors fishin’/huntin’/shootin’ childhood. We were both basketball point guards and we still like to run 6-7 miles most days (granted a normal schedule). My sister went to college in Moscow, just like Palin, and played NCAA volleyball (that’s Moscow, Idaho, location of U of Idaho—Go Vandals!). She has a nice, natural speaking voice in her speeches and answers to questions (better than McCain, H. Clinton, or Bush…not as good as Obama or B. Clinton).

As I found out more, however, it's became obvious that she was simply a more extreme, less-experienced version of Mike Huckabee (but with added soap-opera family drama). Any national political future Palin has is at the Huckabee-Buchanan level…limited to a niche candidate of the Christian Right.

But back to that topic that so infuriates you—Obama. His transition is progressing exactly as I anticipated—I’m satisfied. As a pragmatic Independent I settled on Obama early. His ability to answer in other than sound bites is what first started me paying attention and through his actions and statements (and Cabinet appointments), he’s demonstrated a rational pragmatism, self-discipline, thoughtful temperament, and innate intelligence that continue to encourage me.

I expected a disciplined, tough, realistic pragmatist and I’m satisfied. But let’s not forget that Obama has been President for only a few months, and it will be at least a couple of years until we can start making real judgments.

Posted by: malis | July 1, 2009 9:06 PM | Report abuse

malis:

I am still waiting for you to post even one quote of mine that you feel is "irrational" (as I am more than willing to explain why you are mistaken).

Posted by: JakeD | July 1, 2009 9:00 PM | Report abuse

GregoryJ, I provided a list of verifiable facts and all you can come back with is emotional fact-free insults? Ahhh, the gloriously obsessive anti-Obama fantasists who insist on continually posting their repetitive screeds to every possible article…here, in all its magnificent logical rationality is what seems to be their entire understanding of the world:

“Muslim William Ayers Hussein Pledge of Allegiance
Birth certificate Wife's comments Hussein Muslim
Anti-Christ Black PLO Militant Spread the wealth
Rezko Natural-born Bitter Guns Religion Elite Kenya
Muslim Socialist Indonesian school Hussein Whitey
Muslim Celebrity Reverend Wright Muslim Messiah
Citizen Paris Hilton Blagojevich Public financing Hussein
Hawaii Muslim Chicago Khalidi Foreign Redistribute
Hussein Flag pin Muslim Airplane decal Muslim
ACORN Presidency symbols Hussein Office of the
President-Elect Muslim.”

Notice what’s missing there? Try:

“Iraq Economy Transportation Asia Education China
Defense Science Labor Troops Immigration Energy
Civil Liberties Europe Education Deficit Cities Trade
Latin America Healthcare Iran Veterans Agriculture India
PakistanManufacturing Competiveness Commerce
Infrastructure Middle-East Environment.”

Many ultra-conservatives and ultra-liberals spend nearly all their time in an ‘echo-chamber’ of their own views. This can fool people into thinking their own views, principles and prejudices are far more widely shared than is actually true (the famous example of this was Pauline Kael’s (NYTimes writer) statement: “How could Nixon have won? I don’t know anyone who voted for him!”).

My disappointment is in that all GregJ’s and JakeD’s comments are simply the familiar fantasies quoted from the ultra-right echo chamber. As they limit their sources of information to Fox, Limbaugh, and WorldNetDaily (in increasing steps of reality avoidance), the echo-chamber effect becomes nearly complete, and the originations of their lists of Obama grievances understandable.

The reason I thank the Wacky Acolytes is the lesson they’re providing to sane Republicans…who are slowly coming to understand that as long as their ultra-right wing continually obsesses on the utterly trivial, entirely irrelevant, and completely fictional, they will continue to lose elections (national, state, and local) simply by being unable to demonstrate the ability to rationally address meaningful issues.

So thank you JakeD, GregJ and friends, for so obviously abandoning the field of rational discourse. Please continue. Please keep trying to convince all your Republican friends to follow your lead. Please continue to demonstrate the absolute irrelevance of the anti-Obamanites who will never ever be able to accept the real world.

Posted by: malis | July 1, 2009 8:48 PM | Report abuse

JakeD wrote: "For those who [attempt] to group Palin supporters into "uneducated and/or horndogs" it's completely relevant." July 1, 2009 7:30 PM

Yes it is "completely relevant" isn't it.

"Uneducated" being the euphemism of choice for: hoodwinked, suckered, brainwashed, fleeced or fooled. Stop trying to pass Palin's good looks and freshness off as qualifications for POTUS and "horndog" (and synonyms) will not be used.

Posted by: EuroAm | July 1, 2009 8:46 PM | Report abuse

It is truley amazing how many so called non-baised pundips attack Sara Palin at every turn. Is it bacause maybe she might be a breath of fresh air on the politicial front? Clearely she is more qualified than the rock star Oblable and his groupe minions. She almost pulled the republican party out of the fire by her self. If she had been on the top of the ticket she would be in the White House now. She is a true born in American patriot. Her family may have some warts and ugly spots but she has worked most of her life and had more work experience and political savy than the commuity organizer. After all this is the longest he has ever worked in his life. Doesn't it make you wonder what he is hiding by blocking and sealign all of his records, birth certificate and who knows what else the Demorape party has worked so hard to bury or change? At least Sarah dosn't have to apoliigize for her relegious beleifs. Her minister hasn't cursed Amrica and her friends arent Anti-american rable rousers.

Posted by: jmsmaxwell | July 1, 2009 8:39 PM | Report abuse

Check out The Daily Dish today. THere is a photo of Palin in running clothes with an American flag used as a prop thrown over a chair like a rag. I think that sums up her "patriotism" perfectly. She is rough trade; a nasty piece of work. Her kid Trig is a prop in her show, just like the flag. I sincerely hope for a miracle and she snags the nomination in 2012. It will be horrible but fascinating to watch her destruction over the months. By the way, why has she never come clean with the truth about her "pregnancy"?

Posted by: PJTramdack | July 1, 2009 8:38 PM | Report abuse

gregoryjones1 can you please check with our Stanford JD, JakeD, about whether they give out the presidency at the Harvard Law Review as part of affirmative action? JakeD might disappoint you.
Also, you dismiss his work as a community organizer. I guess you respect more those who went to Wall Street and capitalized on their Harvard law degrees.
You might not like Obama, but at least give him credit for his achievements. Like Palin, he did not start life with the privileges that GW Bush enjoyed, and both Palin and Obama have been untraditional overachievers. Still, Obama had the harder road.
There seems to be more than a little bit of envy, a lot of racism and a strong odor of self pity in your posts.
But really, if you had to have someone argue your case and win, would you prefer Sarah Palin or Barack Obama as your advocate? If you have to think hard about the answer, so bet it.

Posted by: gratianus | July 1, 2009 8:37 PM | Report abuse

EuroAm...No. Get out of our country! We are AMERICANS HERE. You love Europe so much? Stay there, go there, whatever...This is OUR country." Posted by: gregoryjones1 | July 1, 2009 7:28 PM


HE DID IT! HE MISSED THE BARN!
This "ranting adolescent having a temper tantrum" style of delivery lends nothing the the validity of the message, does speak volumes about the speaker though.

Hardly believe 70% there sport. BTW, both grandmothers were DAR, are/were your's?

Posted by: EuroAm | July 1, 2009 8:15 PM | Report abuse

I find it amazing how many left-wing bloggers and pundits slam Sarah Palin (many attacks are far below the belt). If conservative bloggers and pundits did the same to Hillary Clinton, calls of sexism and misogyny would be plentiful, but no one stands up for Palin.
I don't support Sarah Palin, but give her a break everybody. Gary Johnson (the former governor of New Mexico) has my vote if he runs in 2012.

Posted by: roesch | July 1, 2009 8:13 PM | Report abuse

obama is NOTHING like Abe Lincoln. NOTHING! He is a celebrity, nothing more. I can hardly wait for that fake user to fall flat on his face.

Tell us, how long will be before even his WORSHIPPERS betray him?

Posted by: gregoryjones1 | July 1, 2009 8:12 PM | Report abuse

malis,

"moral core"? He was forced out of his racist church of 20 years and you say "moral core"?

I'm wacky because I don't fall into line?

All those little points you brought up about obama mean nothing where real leadership is concerned. Having degrees that were given to you because of your skin color is not all that hard. All ya have to do is show up.

A real leader would be able to get more than a fake 60 percent approval rating.

A real leader would also be able to "inspire and lead" at least a healthy majority of those who do not agree with him.

Your vote was dictated by the MSM. You made no "intelligent" decision. You voted with your emotions, not on substance.

Let me ask you how happy are you going to feel when that child forces 20 million illegals from Mexico on you and the rest of our nation?

Posted by: gregoryjones1 | July 1, 2009 8:09 PM | Report abuse

JakeD

No, only those of the 60 million with Stanford Law degrees. Allegedly, they've been educated to know better than to install a completely empty head anywhere other than a sorority house.

Posted by: skyjord | July 1, 2009 8:08 PM | Report abuse

"Others within the GOP family believe that a combination of a return to first principles..."

Would that not be a return to being the Party of Lincoln -- a position forsaken by the invitation of the Dixiecrat/segregationist element to join and help transform the party in the 1960s?

A position now made impossible because another party's new leadership has effectively claimed that mantle?

Posted by: dogmo | July 1, 2009 8:07 PM | Report abuse

Oh, and of course we can add GregoryJones as a WA (Wacky Acolyte). GJ asked “What qualified obama for the presidency? How can you not see the similiarities [sic] if you are educated? Do you truly think that an affirimative [sic] action degree from some stupid university is good enough?”

Although his positions are certainly more liberal than mine, I voted for Obama because I made a considered judgment that he has a rational pragmatism (the ability to change his mind based on new information) that would allow him to consider other points of view, and an innate intelligence and moral core that would guide sound decisions.

Other reasons?

— Unique upbringing, international exposure, understanding of different cultural environments
— Forced into understanding of different points of view, by being not entirely a member of any group
— Columbia Degree in International Relations
— Community organizer, with results, in poorest Chicago (before going to Law School)
— MagnaCumLaude from Harvard Law
— President of Harvard Law Review
— Civil rights attorney
— Constitutional law Prof for 10 yrs (and isn’t it great to have a President who’s actually read the Federalist Papers and understands the Constitution?)
— IL State Senator for 8 yrs, passing healthcare for 150,000 people, ethics reform, videotaping interrogations
— US Senator for 4 years; Senate Foreign Relations Committee, bills including weapons threat reduction, government transparency, lobbyist reforms, veteran's disability help, and (co-sponsored with McCain) Carbon Reductions.

Add to that something Charles Krauthammer said that cannot be said of either Bush or McCain: “…[Obama]'s got both a first-class intellect and a first-class temperament.”

Obama seems strong enough on substance to me. Is it wrong that he is also eloquent and inspiring? Again, came down to who I thought has the highest upside, albeit, with some risk (and McCain was a pretty high risk too).

I believe that over the last half century our national political system has grown so distorted that it’s become nearly impossible for the people we’d most want to be President, to make it through either Party's nominating process. As I’ve said here before (as my take on the ‘Change’ argument), the combination of Obama’s unprecedented path to the nomination and unique worldview means he will be very different from any President of the last several decades. I thought something very different was necessary.

Final point. It became convinced that the Republicans, through their actions and performance over the last eight years, forfeited their moral claim to the Presidency this election cycle. I have some hope that perhaps a stint as the Loyal Opposition will change their focus from attaining “The Permanent Republican Majority,” to what they said was the theme of their convention: Country First.

Posted by: malis | July 1, 2009 8:01 PM | Report abuse

"She is an irresistible personality"

Says you...

I'd prefer a plate of steaming dog poo for dinner, for president, for dog catcher, for Miss Alaska, for, hell, anything...

Or are you saying "compared to JakeD"...?

Posted by: LeroyTheRoadie1 | July 1, 2009 7:59 PM | Report abuse

Hey, libs!

Keep up the personal attacks against Gov. Palin (and, especially, against her under-aged children). You'll never see it coming.

Posted by: JakeD | July 1, 2009 7:59 PM | Report abuse

skyjord:

You think that almost 60 million Americans who voted for Palin last time around were also in the "PREPOSTEROUS" group?

Posted by: JakeD | July 1, 2009 7:54 PM | Report abuse

After the media spotlight of the last election on Palin, her popularity in Alaska has plummeted, and it was always low nationally, with only the Limbaugh crowd loving her. The Dems are praying she'll lead a '12 ticket.

Posted by: aguy7 | July 1, 2009 7:53 PM | Report abuse

jimeglrd:

In your State, last election, you could have voted for Chuck BALDWIN, Bob BARR, Cynthia McKINNEY, or Ralph NADER. Any of those would have been a better choice than not voting at all.

Posted by: JakeD | July 1, 2009 7:53 PM | Report abuse

JakeD:

My high regard for Stanford has been destroyed by your statement. Clearly, the law school class in which you graduated couldn't have been larger than one.

But to your question, you belong in the PREPOSTEROUS group.

Posted by: skyjord | July 1, 2009 7:49 PM | Report abuse

"They remember what happened after Bill Clinton won the White House and how Republicans hunkered down, created a wall of resistance to Clinton's agenda (particularly health care) and successfully stoked the anti-government sentiment around the country. The result was the landslide of 1994 that drove Democrats from power in Congress."

What is increasingly obvious to me is that we enjoy a government of the Politicians, for the Politicians. Those who presume to represent us in the capitals seem primarily concerned with issues of personal advancement. The machinations that take place within the halls where the future of the everyday people is determined are geared not toward the betterment of our lives, but toward the primacy of one group of politicans over another.

Certainly I'm just naive, but I don't see why I shouldn't expect better, nor do I see a reason not to be disappointed.

Posted by: piperdawn | July 1, 2009 7:46 PM | Report abuse

gregoryjones1:

If McCain had gone with someone like Biden (Lieberman, for instance), they would have lost by a landslide.

Posted by: JakeD | July 1, 2009 7:43 PM | Report abuse

jimeglrd8:

Not voting is the WORST option. Here in California, we have plenty of other choices, including the American Independent Party. May I suggest you look into (or start) a third party?

Posted by: JakeD | July 1, 2009 7:41 PM | Report abuse

Finally, for those of you who think Palin lost the election for McCain think again.

McCain didn't have a chance after MOST of the MSM threw their allegiance to obama. When Palin was announced many Americans were reenergized. At least he chose a woman instead of a fool like Biden. I think we can ALL agree that if Biden were president it would be EVEN worse than having the child/celebrity obama.

Try to remember that almost half of Americans (who voted) voted for McCain and Palin. In an election that large a few million votes (where at least a mil or two were probably frauds cast for obama...illegals, dead people, etc) more is not a MANDATE!

If Americans are so enthralled with obama why didn't he win with a much larger margin? Why not? Because without the help of the MSM, that pathetic creature couldn't have won a spelling bee.

No. Your view about Palin are typical. Typical of people who claim to be tolerant and want that in return, but who rarely show it towards others.

Posted by: gregoryjones1 | July 1, 2009 7:40 PM | Report abuse

malis:

Post even ONE quote from me you think is "irrational".

Posted by: JakeD | July 1, 2009 7:37 PM | Report abuse

Koolkat, Billy (and others who noticed), yes, cschotta and d25cav are only a couple more of the repetitious Wacky Acolytes, as in an observation I've made before:

What JakeD, Kouk, and the rest of the Wacky Acolytes are doing—through fleeing the field of rational discourse and continuing to press forward their fictional stories—is simply demonstrating the utter incoherence, fearful fanatical craziness, and absolute irrelevance of that tiny intense class of fantasists who find what meaning in life they can, only in attacking what they can't understand.

JakeD asks “I graduated at the top of my class from Stanford Law School and would still vote Palin for President. Which "group" do I fall into?”

That would be the “Fantasists” group.

Posted by: malis | July 1, 2009 7:34 PM | Report abuse

I was a Republican delegate to the Tennessee state Republican convention in 1964 and a strong supporter of Barry Goldwater. By 1968, after serving in Vietnam for a year, I was a Democratic delegate to the 1968 Tennessee state Democratic convention and a strong supporter of Eugene McCarthy. Since 1968 I have consistently voted for the Democratic candidate for President. I donated money to the Obama campaign and voted for him in the 2008 election. I was glad to see John McCain choose Sarah Palin as his running mate. It confirmed my belief that McCain was a "lightweight". Although I am against almost everything Governor Palin stands for there are some things I like about her. She isn't a graduate of an "Ivy League" school. She is a long way from being an intellectual. She tried to identify with the large numbers of voters who are "lower" middle class. She is tough and nominally attractive. She is from the 49th state and I am from the 50th state and our two states have often been linked. Nevertheless, I think there is absolutely no chance that she will be a strong contender for the Republican nomination for President in 2012.
I am in the midst of another change in my party affiliation. I am bitterly disappointed in Obamas' failure to keep what he led me to believe was his promise to withdraw US troops from Iraq. I strongly oppose his expansion of the war in Afghanistan. I bitterly oppose his denial of due process to the prisoners being held at "Gitmo" and at other secret prisons operated by the US all over the world. Unfortunately I don't see any place to go. The GOP isn't offering any sort of alternative to Obama. I would guess that there are lots of other voters who feel the same way. I guess the best alternative is not to vote next time around.

Posted by: jimeglrd8 | July 1, 2009 7:33 PM | Report abuse

Grantius,

What qualified obama for the presidency? How can you not see the similiarities if you are educated?

Do you truly think that an affirimative action degree from some stupid university is good enough? He was a senator for less than 2 years and most of that he was campaigning!

Oh, that's right community activisism takes sooooo much inteligence and leadership?

Your view are intolerant and are a joke.

Posted by: gregoryjones1 | July 1, 2009 7:31 PM | Report abuse

For those who attemtp to group Palin supporters into "uneducated and/or horndogs" it's completely relevant.

Posted by: JakeD | July 1, 2009 7:30 PM | Report abuse

EuroAm?

No. Get out of our country! We are AMERICANS HERE. You love Europe so much? Stay there, go there, whatever!

This is OUR country.

Posted by: gregoryjones1 | July 1, 2009 7:28 PM | Report abuse

JakeD: Let me ignore your snarky comments about the question I posed (JakeD (6:43PM): Please explain to those of us who think that Stanford grads, even JDs, use their brains and explain why Palin's selection as VP candidate was not a strategic blunder that made Obama's election a certainty? Aside from being deeply ignorant, she was appallingly divisive. But that was just my opinion.)
Yes, I recognize that Palin was running as VP in 2008 and, I presume, aspires to run at the top of the ticket in 2012, so the question remains what qualifies her for either office? As for "values," my next door neighbor has the same values, I respect him, but don't believe he would make much of a president.
Finally, please drop references to your place in your class at Stanford. For those of us who think that arguments should stand on their merits, where you got your degree is immaterial.

Posted by: gratianus | July 1, 2009 7:28 PM | Report abuse

"I graduated at the top of my class from Stanford Law School and would still vote Palin for President. Which "group" do I fall into?"

The one noted for thinking with their small head first and large head hardly at all.

Posted by: EuroAm | July 1, 2009 7:26 PM | Report abuse

Gratianus - your arrogance and the continued arrogance of a completely biased MSM will ENSURE the unseating of the Dem Party's majorities in the next elections.

The fraud Obama (I would have voted for Hillary) will NOT be re-selected (MSM again).

How do you know what the American people think and feel about Governor, I repeat Governor Palin?

I am a former Dem, former Repub, now Independant. I am also OPENLY GAY, not closeted, not self-loathing as so many of my intolerant gay brothers and sisters like to say about.

I only bring up the gay part because I support Palin. She is fresh. She is not a disgusting insider like all the rest of BOTH VILE PARTIES.

The way you and those like you trashed her during the "selection" process was disgraceful.

To think that you believe you are educated! You actually think that pathetic child obama had better leadership qualities than Palin? Palin has an almost 80 percent favorablity rating in her state - that means BOTH parties there think she governs well.

Keep spreading the lies about her. So what if she is religious? There are too many Americans who are not that far right on religion to allow her or any other group to push that envelope very hard.

How anybody in their right mind can be "for" Obama and then think that somebody like Palin is somehow less than him is ludicrous.

Grow up.

Posted by: gregoryjones1 | July 1, 2009 7:24 PM | Report abuse

It is difficult not to see this "fierce internecine war" within the GOP as substantially a media creation. Most of the alleged disagreements involving Sarah Palin include one or more media persona as a principle antagonist. From Day One of her VP candidacy the major media have delighted in using her as a weapon to create an exaggerated illusion of turmoil within the Republican Party. The GOP has plenty of time to screen its potential leaders. Inter-party disagreement at this stage is not conclusive evidence of an implosion. To paraphrase an old quotation, rumors of the Republican Party's death are premature.

Posted by: bubba31138 | July 1, 2009 7:24 PM | Report abuse

Let me guess, you really honestly think that GWB set demolition explosives under the WTC, right?

Posted by: JakeD | July 1, 2009 7:24 PM | Report abuse

Or, FDR "hoped" for an attack on Pearl Harbor as an excuse to enter WWII?

Posted by: JakeD | July 1, 2009 7:23 PM | Report abuse

nodebris:

Do you similarly believe that Abe Lincoln "hoped" for a Civil War or attack on Fort Sumter?

Posted by: JakeD | July 1, 2009 7:15 PM | Report abuse

grantianus:

I must have missed where you asked me "What would Palin have brought to the Oval Office?" First, she and McCain received almost 60 million votes, so that's more than 30%. Second, she was running for VICE President, which is not housed in the Oval Office. Third, if they had been elected and something tragic had happened to President McCain, President Palin would have brought a bedrock set of values to the Oval Office -- they were evident in her acceptance speech and debate -- just like Teddy Roosevelt and Ronald Reagan did. Nothing adequately prepares a person for the job of President of United States. She was more qualified than Obama though. Next imaginary question you think you asked but didn't?

Posted by: JakeD | July 1, 2009 7:14 PM | Report abuse

Well lookee here.
The left-wing commie lovers are at it again. Incapable of logically attacking issues, they prefer to attack the person and are the most dehumanizing facet of this once great nation. As such they have dehumanized themselves and have stripped away any vestige of camouflage, showing themselves for the putridity they are, from 1600 Pennsylvania Ave on down. Try logic, cretins, instead of the rabid mad dog satanistic swine you so adept at puking up.

Posted by: d25cav | July 1, 2009 7:12 PM | Report abuse

jaked keeps on hoping for a civil war or an attack from Osama. Because he's such a good American.

Posted by: nodebris | July 1, 2009 7:08 PM | Report abuse

JakeD: Referring to poll data you saw that showed Palin added more votes for McCain than she created for Obama has any number of holes in it (aside from whether you can cite chapter and verse), but you did not answer the question as to what Palin would bring to the Oval Office and how, given her performance during and since the presidential campaign, anyone would know those qualities exist. Please explain to those of us who are not among the 30% of America that still thinks the Bush years were wonderful and that Obama is a socialist, Moslem, non-native American and has Bill Ayres write his books?

Posted by: gratianus | July 1, 2009 7:07 PM | Report abuse

"And do you think that Jesus would pal around Barack Hussein Obama, who thinks abortion is a right? lol"

I bet you think Jesus would pal around with you, right?

Posted by: nodebris | July 1, 2009 7:05 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: JakeD | July 1, 2009 7:04 PM | Report abuse

"Utopia=No more liberals!"

Move to Burma, then. Or Somalia. Or Saudi Arabia. There are lots of places untouched by the Enlightenment that should suit you just fine.

Posted by: nodebris | July 1, 2009 7:03 PM | Report abuse

She may be pro-lifers' last, best chance. I'm afraid if she's not elected President soon, there will be another American Civil war.

Posted by: JakeD | July 1, 2009 7:02 PM | Report abuse

"Others within the GOP family believe that a combination of a return to first principles, the addition of some fresh faces who can attractively repackage a conservative agenda..."

Oh Goody, Republicans Repeat Rhetoric - Rehashed, Repackaged and Regurgitated for Re-consummation.

Posted by: EuroAm | July 1, 2009 6:57 PM | Report abuse

mackiejw:

Are you still around?

Posted by: JakeD | July 1, 2009 6:56 PM | Report abuse

Of course, we are all entitled to our opinions -- the exit polling data I saw showed that Gov. Palin brought the ticket more votes than she lost to Obama -- any more questions?

Posted by: JakeD | July 1, 2009 6:55 PM | Report abuse

JakeD (6:43PM): Please explain to those of us who think that Stanford grads, even JDs, use their brains and explain why Palin's selection as VP candidate was not a strategic blunder that made Obama's election a certainty? Aside from being deeply ignorant, she was appallingly divisive. But that was just my opinion.

Posted by: gratianus | July 1, 2009 6:52 PM | Report abuse

jaynasvil:

Gov. Palin did not submit HERSELF to an exorcism (or were you confusing that with a baptism?).

Posted by: JakeD | July 1, 2009 6:51 PM | Report abuse

The fact that ANY GOP strategists take Sarah Palin seriously as a presidential candidate shows they've lost sight of what matters. Having the looks of a model do not counteract a lack of knowledge about the realities of the world. Submitting oneself to bizarre religious rituals to drive out evil spirits does not make others feel that she won't be trying to impose her extreme religious beliefs on the country. The GOP is hopeless if they think she is their golden ticket.

Posted by: jaynashvil | July 1, 2009 6:47 PM | Report abuse

The portion of the Republican party that embraces Sara Palin, seeing her as the leader to retake the White House in 2012, is the distallate of the party's Southern Strategy, which began as an appeal to southern "Democrats" alienated by the civil rights reforms in the 1960s and 1970s. The Republican party found it useful to expand its belief system to develop "values" positions against whatever frightens and upsets this same parochial group. Hence, we got the anti-abortion, anti-gay, anti-gun control, anti-evolution, anti-stem cell etc. planks in state and national platforms, which have come to define "conservatism."
Unfortunately for the Republican party and thanks to its arrogance during the Bush administration these positions became their dominant message, and the American electorate repudiated them in 2006 and 2008.
It's unlikely that America will accept those positions anytime soon. Unless the party figures out how to escape its base, it's doomed. And if it chooses Palin, it will be clear that the Republican party is owned by its base, whose views are repugnant to most Americans. Palin might be charistmatic but only to that retrograde faction.

Posted by: gratianus | July 1, 2009 6:45 PM | Report abuse

mackiejw:

I graduated at the top of my class from Stanford Law School and would still vote Palin for President. Which "group" do I fall into?

Posted by: JakeD | July 1, 2009 6:43 PM | Report abuse

The portion of the Republican party that embraces Sara Palin, seeing her as the leader to retake the White House in 2012, is the distallate of the party's Southern Strategy, which began as an appeal to southern "Democrats" alienated by the civil rights reforms in the 1960s and 1970s. The Republican party found it useful to expand its belief system to develop "values" positions against whatever frightens and upsets this same parochial group. Hence, we got the anti-abortion, anti-gay, anti-gun control, anti-evolution, anti-stem cell etc. planks in state and national platforms, which have come to define "conservatism."
Unfortunately for the Republican party and thanks to its arrogance during the Bush administration these positions became their dominant message, and the American electorate repudiated them in 2006 and 2008.
It's unlikely that America will accept those positions anytime soon, and thus, unless Palin can recast herself, she will not represent anyone in the 2012 presidential sweepstakes.

Posted by: gratianus | July 1, 2009 6:42 PM | Report abuse

There's no surprise that Palin remains a controversial figure with the public at large. Her performance in the campaign created a wide gulf in public opinion between those who found her fresh and appealing and those who found her shallow and unready.

---------------------

That describes it perfectly and defines 2 groups

1) Those who found her fresh and appealing

That's the group of mentally challenged people with IQs smaller than 10 (see posters "cshotta1" and "nowecant")and GOPers with the same illness like Ensign, Sanders and a bunch of others, who would have liked to get in Palin's panties if only her Husband would not have been around 24/7

2)Those who found her shallow and unready.

That's the intelligent and able to think folks; those realizing that this empty sack is way too shallow and dumb to be even considered an able politician. 50 years of tutoring would not help an iota.

Posted by: mackiejw | July 1, 2009 6:39 PM | Report abuse

The Democrats will do everything in their power to make sure she is a candidate!

Posted by: buzzsaw1 | July 1, 2009 6:29 PM | Report abuse

She's the female George W. Bush, just a bit more eloquent on the rubber chicken circuit. Her appeal is GOP lust.

Posted by: whocares666 | July 1, 2009 6:28 PM | Report abuse

Governor Palin does have a tremendous talent to move people. What makes her dangerous is her complete ignorance about the consequence of her ignorance especially for those mindless people who are moved by her are. These people are totally driven by their emotions and are easily incited to violence.


The frightening thing about Palin is her cockroach nature. No matter how badly she fly she always land on her feet but she leaves behind total destruction.

Posted by: SteelWheel25 | July 1, 2009 6:10 PM | Report abuse

Even if the GOP remains stuck, they will 'move' in relation to a Dem party that may kill any chance of true reform. The parties will then grow closer together as it is revealed that they are both 'just in it for the money'. Once they are painted the same, the GOP can come back on a 'what's the difference' platform. The difference being they are much better at justifying injustice.

Posted by: twstroud | July 1, 2009 6:10 PM | Report abuse

People who vote Republican who concur with cschotta1 need to go elsewhere, perhaps even form their own independent political party (The Wingnut Party?). Why? Because I, being a moderate Republican, want my Party back, so it can contribute something of value to my country again. Sanford, Ensign, and Palin (among others) have reduced it to a laughingstock (due to the hypocrisy if nothing else).

I want to pry the inner apparatus out of the hands of the wingnuts running it into the ground (mainly to satisfy their ignorant self-delusions) today. But no one seems willing to do it.

Posted by: hogsmile
***********************

Well said and appreciated. The solution? Back the tentative steps made by a few this year--but completely abandoned--to disavow Limbaugh and his ilk. That's made doubly difficult, I'm afraid, by Obama's extremely shrewd political moves thrusting the egotist front and center. Good luck: the country really does need smart, realistic conservatives!!

Posted by: abqcleve | July 1, 2009 6:05 PM | Report abuse

Sarah Palin is like a bad reality show that should've been canceled before it went into production.

Posted by: JaneB08 | July 1, 2009 6:00 PM | Report abuse

Question to conservatives not employed as CEO's of major energy companies: What benefit is their to you in denying global warming? Al Gore is far from the only person who acknowledges global warming.

Posted by: billy8
**************************

Interesting tidbit for you: I work for a major energy producer and my company's CEO, joined by several other progressive leaders in the industry, actively supports the bill that the House passed. They know that there's no alternative but to act, it's the right thing to do, and by getting out in front of the curve, there's actually money to be made by helping set direction and strategies. My company's CEO is almost certainly a Republican, but he's not stupid..

Posted by: abqcleve | July 1, 2009 5:56 PM | Report abuse


People who vote Republican who concur with cschotta1 need to go elsewhere, perhaps even form their own independent political party (The Wingnut Party?). Why? Because I, being a moderate Republican, want my Party back, so it can contribute something of value to my country again. Sanford, Ensign, and Palin (among others) have reduced it to a laughingstock (due to the hypocrisy if nothing else).

I want to pry the inner apparatus out of the hands of the wingnuts running it into the ground (mainly to satisfy their ignorant self-delusions) today. But no one seems willing to do it.
----------------------------------------
Just drop the religion, and turn the GOP into a libertarian party. Someone to tell Nancy Pelosi she can't have all the money she wants.
cschotta1 is probably 17 years old. I wouldn't worry about him/her.

Posted by: billy8 | July 1, 2009 5:56 PM | Report abuse

People who vote Republican who concur with cschotta1 need to go elsewhere, perhaps even form their own independent political party (The Wingnut Party?). Why? Because I, being a moderate Republican, want my Party back, so it can contribute something of value to my country again. Sanford, Ensign, and Palin (among others) have reduced it to a laughingstock (due to the hypocrisy if nothing else).

I want to pry the inner apparatus out of the hands of the wingnuts running it into the ground (mainly to satisfy their ignorant self-delusions) today. But no one seems willing to do it.

Posted by: hogsmile | July 1, 2009 5:53 PM | Report abuse

"Palin retains much of her attractiveness to the voting public. Her best move would be to run for an available seat either in the U.S. House or Senate - to enhance her credibility as a national leader. 2012 may be too early. 2016 might be Palin's date."

------------------------------------
I think cooler heads will prevail, and the GOP will somehow prevent that from happening. She is way too far to the right for most of America. She might win the Republican primary, but she really has no shot in a general election where she would have to present herself as a centrist.

Posted by: billy8 | July 1, 2009 5:46 PM | Report abuse

"To those who were on the inside, there was virtually no way for McCain to defeat Obama in a year when George W. Bush's approval rating was below 30 percent, when more than eight in 10 Americans thought the country was off track."

Indeed - McCain's selection of Palin was a shrewd move that put him within striking distance of winning the election. Had McCain rejected the bank bailout in October (and had Obama still supported it), Palin might be Vice-President today.

Palin retains much of her attractiveness to the voting public. Her best move would be to run for an available seat either in the U.S. House or Senate - to enhance her credibility as a national leader. 2012 may be too early. 2016 might be Palin's date.

Posted by: LeszX | July 1, 2009 5:36 PM | Report abuse

I hear the right comment that the Republican party ought to return to its Christian values roots as directed by the Evangelical wing of Christianity. Being a Christian of a different stripe, my understanding of Christ is somewhat different from theirs and in my opinion, more theologically correct. In fact, to me, being an Evangelical is just about as backward thinking as it gets. So, put me and others who think like me in the same party as Evangelicals and we get a really good fight that eventually ends up electing Democrats. How the Al Franken's of the world love us.

Maybe we ought to leave religion out of it. I am all for it but I will bet you my last buck that those backward Evangelicals, who think God only speaks to them, won't. I, who equally thinks God does not speak to Evangelicals alone, can't get it through these people's head just how dead wrong they are about Christ let alone that religion should play no part in politics. But then again I have two kids who actually voted for Obama. They won't admit it openly. I don't know why.

Posted by: JLFuller | July 1, 2009 5:35 PM | Report abuse

Too bad Charles Grassley is too old to run. I could vote for a Republican like that. I have nothing against simple, honest, plain-spoken people.

I don't count Sarah Palin among their number. There's a bit too much Eau d'Demagogue about here - a tendency to try to win favor by demonizing people who are themselves victims.

I don't think even George W. Bush had that stink about him.

Posted by: douglaslbarber | July 1, 2009 5:35 PM | Report abuse

I hear the right comment that the Republican party ought to return to its Christian values roots as directed by the Evangelical wing of Christianity. Being a Christian of a different stripe, my understanding of Christ is somewhat different from theirs and,in my opinion, more theologically correct. In fact, to me, being an Evangelical is just about as backward thinking as it gets. So, put me and others who think like me in the same party as Evangelicals and we get a really good fight that eventually ends up electing Democrats. How the Al Franken's of the world love us.

Maybe we ought to leave religion out of it. I am all for it but I will bet you my last buck that the Evangelicals, who think God only speaks to them, won't. I, who equally thinks God does not speak to Evangelicals alone, can't get it through these people's head just how dead wrong they are about Christ let alone that religion should play no part in politics. But then again I have two kids who actually voted for Obama. They won't admit it openly. I don't why.

Posted by: JLFuller | July 1, 2009 5:33 PM | Report abuse

"Palin is not evil nor is she stupid. She is uneducated and comes across as essentially illiterate. Her choice of words and sentence structure are a sign of a poor education..."

There have been many brilliant politicians, writers etc who came from uneducated surroundings. They were bright enough to take every opportunity to get an education, to learn. The reason I believe Sarah Palin is actually rather dumb, is that she doesn't understand this, the value of knowledge and education. She can be sly, but she is not really intelligent. Had she been, she would have improved herself twenty years ago. Now she will never change.

Posted by: asoders22 | July 1, 2009 5:31 PM | Report abuse

If the GOP sees Palin as anything but a vicious and stupid bimbo then the GOP deserves a few generations in the wilderness. I mean, really, she's dumb as a bag of hair.

Posted by: chrisfox8 | July 1, 2009 5:24 PM | Report abuse

Palin scares me the same way Hitler would have scared me in the 1930s. She has a talent for stirring up losers looking for someone to blame (other than themselves, of course) for their problems.

She's convincing to her supporters not because she's got real answers, but because she's *like* them. Not too bright (about Oprah watcher intelligence), pretty and adept at catchy, simplistic, utterly wrong answers.

She's also willing to tolerate hatred and violence, even encourage it, if it serves her purpose. At her rallies where "Kill Obama" was shouted by her supporters, her silence said more about her than any words could.

McCain, to his credit, calmed the crowd when this happened. Unlike Palin, he has moral integrity and cares about the country.

So, yes, she scares me. She can stir a thousand witless fools to damage themselves and the USA at large while convincing them that they're fighting for justice, freedom, truth and the American way. Don't we have enough of that? Do we need another faction who wants to do it with guns and bombs (Remember Oklahoma City?) instead of money?

Posted by: ian807 | July 1, 2009 5:24 PM | Report abuse

‘Palin’, or to ‘palin’, or to have ‘palined’:

PALIN \pay-lyn\ adverb 1. to naively, ignorantly and inappropriately accept a position while not having the requisite qualifications 2. to have naively and inappropriately accept a political nomination without blinking, when one should have not only blinked, but also thought about ones’ own lack of qualifications and the expected mal-effects on one’s self, family, political party or country; as in: ‘to pull a palin’ 3. to inappropriately blame the media for accurately noting ones’ lack of qualifications after one naively and inappropriately accepted a political nomination for which they did not hold the experience or qualifications for.

PALINED \pay-lyn-ed\ verb 1. to have pulled off a bone-headed action, or a boner; as in: ‘to palin’ or ‘to have palined’ 2. when a crony is offered, and accepts, a government position which they have not the experience or qualifications for, and then problems occur because of this, as in: Sara Palin palined when she hired her unqualified high school friends for high offices in Alaska; or, as in: John McCain palined when he choose Sara Palin as his Vice President nomination. 3. to hire cronies or other unqualified people, so that they do a poor job so it looks like the government can not handle societies needs, and so as to promote the privatization of government, by actively acting to make it work poorly, as in: President Bush palined in appointing the FEMA head who palined during New Orleans’ Katrina hurricane.

Posted by: truthforpeace | July 1, 2009 5:23 PM | Report abuse

cschotta: You do realize that once you break out "B. Hussein Obama" you are instantly and forever an idiot, right? And by "idiot", I mean the dumbest of the dumb. Go put on your tin foil hat and play in a thunderstorm.

Posted by: billy8 | July 1, 2009 5:23 PM | Report abuse

The two party system is a healthy mechanism to maintain balance on most issues.

If the GOP decides to run Palin, then that singular act maybe the last "push" by the GOP to regain momentum. Ms. Palin simply does not have the skills nor the knowledge to be President.

We don't need another "Bush"...but from a state of less than 500,000 people...and who share in the proceeds of oil revenue of which the rest of us pay for.

GOP..find someone else!

Posted by: LTC-11A | July 1, 2009 5:23 PM | Report abuse

Dan, you close with a comment that Palin is an 'irresistable personality' after all preceding paragraphs point out how divisive she is even within what's left of her own party. Her looks and appearances may be regarded by some as 'irresistable' but her 'personality' may only be regarded as divisive, ideological, uneducated, combative and doesn't play well with others even among the few supporters who still pal around with her.

Plus she's going to have to deal with the long knives of those within the party who think they've paid their dues longer than her, the Newt, the Mitt, the Huck, the Pawlenty, et al. After that little Republicans attack Republicans battle, her chances for the 2012 nomination will be gone.

Posted by: Patriot3 | July 1, 2009 5:18 PM | Report abuse

cschotta: "Would much rather have them in my party than a sexual predator (Bill Clinton), a dirty old gay man who enjoys little boys (Barney Frank), a murderer (Ted Kennedy), a socialist (Nancy Pelosi) or a radical Muslim (B. Hussein Obama)!"

Not only a troll, but a boring troll. Stale bleats are the sign of a loser.

Posted by: koolkat_1960 | July 1, 2009 5:16 PM | Report abuse

During the campaign, Palin was annoying in the sense that her constant self-promotion as some kind of tireless "reformer" despite any record of reform was insulting to our intelligence and her belief that she was qualified to lead a superpower was absurd and smacked of delusions of grandeur.

However, since the election, her image has changed somewhat and she now comes across more as a self-absorbed teenager obsessed with celebrity and headlines. Or to put it another way, she's morphed from June Cleaver into Paris Hilton.

Posted by: War4Sale | July 1, 2009 5:13 PM | Report abuse

As an atheist democrat, I PRAY that she runs in '12.

Posted by: ewexler1 | July 1, 2009 5:08 PM | Report abuse

cschotta1:
Why don't you go back to bible camp, or whatever hole you crawled out of, lol.

Posted by: billy8 | July 1, 2009 5:07 PM | Report abuse

cschotta1 wrote:
"Atleast she's 100% american!"

Oh yes, she's a real patriot. Here she is speaking at the 2008 Alaska Independence Party Convention in which her husband is a member. They advocate an in-state referendum which includes the option of Alaska becoming an independent nation.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZwvPNXYrIyI

Posted by: wiz_fan | July 1, 2009 4:47 PM

That's right lib, she wanted the federal government to give back the land and away from the likes of Pelosi and the liberal party that wants to own and control you. DO you blame her? lol

- - -

I was unaware that Pelosi owed Alaska. I always thought that the U.S. bought it from Russia in 1867, for $7.2 million. cschotta1, your knowledge is truly enlightening.

Posted by: wiz_fan | July 1, 2009 5:06 PM | Report abuse

I don't think it is being mean to suggest that Palin needs more seasoning to be taken seriously as a Presidential candidate. Just because she got nominated on a lark to be VP by a somewhat desperate McCain, doesn't mean that the next stop for her is now the Presidency. I really think her goal should be to get elected to the Senate and then build her credentials and power base from D.C. rather than from Ankorage, which is logistically VERY difficult to do.

Posted by: skrut003 | July 1, 2009 5:05 PM | Report abuse

As a Democrat who still values a responsible two party system, I wondered, as I read the article, what Bob Dole would have to say about the divisions and discourse on the future within the Republican Party?

Seems to me like he was the last credible and objective Republican heard from. Has it been that long ago?

Posted by: Spectator | July 1, 2009 5:05 PM | Report abuse

I agree with the idea that Sarah Palin is neither an idiot nor a total idealogue however she just plain doesn't know enough to run for the Presidency. Until she learns how to think logically and widens her base of knowledge, it is impossible to tell how capable she might be. Currently, she would be a disastrously ignorant leader.

She is, as several people have commented, extremely poorly educated. You have to go back to nineteenth century Presidents (I'm thinking of Andrew Johnson, whose wife taught him how to read) to find a candidate as unlettered.

Posted by: eskarp | July 1, 2009 5:05 PM | Report abuse

I wish all of the media would do the world a big favor and just not publicize this wannabe at all.

She has an ego bigger than Alaska while her brain is just as frozen.

But, Palin can't stand being out of the limelight. So, what will be her next stunt or outrageous comment?

Who knows?

The real question is:

Who cares?

Palin is a pale reflection of who she thinks she is and never, ever will be.

Yawn.

Posted by: abby0802 | July 1, 2009 5:04 PM | Report abuse

It's obvious with the Ensign / Sanford sex scandals and now this latest "Sarah Palin is what?" controversy, that the Republican Party has lost both its moral compass and its relevance beyond the narrowest-minded traditionalists in its die-hard conservative base. That reduces it to being an irrelevant, fringe political party non-viable in the long term.

Palin herself reflects the worst aspects of it. If Palin is the future of the Republican Party, then the Republican Party has no future.

Posted by: hogsmile | July 1, 2009 4:58 PM

Would much rather have them in my party than a sexual predator (Bill Clinton), a dirty old gay man who enjoys little boys (Barney Frank), a murderer (Ted Kennedy), a socialist (Nancy Pelosi) or a radical Muslim (B. Hussein Obama)!

Posted by: cschotta1 | July 1, 2009 5:04 PM | Report abuse

Sarah Palin is a fine governor but I doubt that she will get the Republican nomination next time.

Of course you never know, since the Republicans nominated McCain last time instead of Gov. Romney who would almost certainly have won the election.

As President Obama continues to spend your tax money at a rate unprecedented in American history it will be interesting to see whether Romney wants to bother running again.

The next president will have to perform miracles to bring America out of the economic bottomless pit that Obama's profligate spending is hurtling us into.

Posted by: BruceMcDougall | July 1, 2009 5:01 PM | Report abuse

It's obvious with the Ensign / Sanford sex scandals and now this latest "Sarah Palin is what?" controversy, that the Republican Party has lost both its moral compass and its relevance beyond the narrowest-minded traditionalists in its die-hard conservative base. That reduces it to being an irrelevant, fringe political party non-viable in the long term.

Palin herself reflects the worst aspects of it. If Palin is the future of the Republican Party, then the Republican Party has no future.

Posted by: hogsmile | July 1, 2009 4:58 PM | Report abuse

cschotta1 wrote:
"Atleast she's 100% american!"

Oh yes, she's a real patriot. Here she is speaking at the 2008 Alaska Independence Party Convention in which her husband is a member. They advocate an in-state referendum which includes the option of Alaska becoming an independent nation.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZwvPNXYrIyI

Posted by: wiz_fan | July 1, 2009 4:47 PM

That's right lib, she wanted the federal government to give back the land and away from the likes of Pelosi and the liberal party that wants to own and control you. DO you blame her? lol

Posted by: cschotta1 | July 1, 2009 4:55 PM | Report abuse

As someone who voted for Obama, I continue to be mystified by the Republican infighting on Sarah Palin. I just don't get it. I read the Vanity Fair article and almost everything in it had already been written elsewhere. Its big accomplishment was really that everything was compiled into one document.

I also don't get this semi-rallying cry that Obama and his supporters must be terrified by Palin. I will admit, that I am terrified at the possibility of her being President, because she reminds me so much of Bush. A person who is shockingly uninformed, doesn't care to be informed, and relies on a small coterie of individuals to make all the decisions. But, do I think its even remotely possible she'll be President? No. I don't even think she'll make it out of the primary. The people I'm watching are Haley Barbour and Mitt Romney.

I also don't understand the whole "oh she's more qualified" argument. She's the leader of a welfare state. She got oil companies who made money in Alaska to all the citizens. Thats closer to the Republican version of socialism or communism or whatever the word of the day is than anything Obama has done so far.

Posted by: alkuth | July 1, 2009 4:55 PM | Report abuse

"Nobody cares about Palin. For every person who truly supports her political career, there are 10,000 who just want to see her naked."

And the latter group will begin to shrink as Palin hits her late 40s and her titz head for the floor.

Posted by: koolkat_1960 | July 1, 2009 4:54 PM | Report abuse

Palin is not evil nor is she stupid. She is uneducated and comes across as essentially illiterate. Her choice of words and sentence structure are a sign of a poor education not some sweet or cute mannerism that endears her to others. I don't know where that notion came from, but most 8th grade English teachers likely cringe listening to Mrs. Palin speaking casually.

We need brilliant people with experience and who can communicate skillfully. In my mind, Mrs. Palin should have stayed at home. She does not represent herself or us Republicans well at all and it all about how she talks.

Posted by: JLFuller | July 1, 2009 4:54 PM | Report abuse

The GOP has become the Jerry Springer party. One faction of the party wants to repeal all taxation and legalize everything and the other faction wants to create a fascistic theocracy where their extreme religious beliefs become codified in law. The thing is, you can't have both - the two views are irreconcilable. Throw in long term demographic trends of a more diverse and liberal electorate and the fact that a self-described "average hockey mom" from Wasilla who can barely form complete sentences is the BEST the party has to offer and you have a party teetering on the verge of total irrelevance. The only chance the party has is to somehow break their addiction to the talk radio nutcases and move back to the reasonable center, but even then, there probably isn't anyway to keep Ron Paul and James Dobson under the same tent any longer. Oh, well.

Posted by: War4Sale | July 1, 2009 4:54 PM | Report abuse

"For every person who truly supports her political career, there are 10,000 who just want to see her naked."

Count me in that 10,000 lol

Posted by: Rev6 | July 1, 2009 4:54 PM | Report abuse

Nobody cares about Palin. For every person who truly supports her political career, there are 10,000 who just want to see her naked.

Spare me from this ridiculous crap, please.

Posted by: jamesbatic | July 1, 2009 4:51 PM | Report abuse

cschotta1 said...
"thinking that growing the government, printing more money . . . (and other such tripe)."

So, for every dollar Alaska sends to Washington, how many dollars does it get back?

Last I heard, it was more than $5.00, with the state in second place less than $2.00. Any good businessman would go for a 400% per year return on investment. Except for Palin and Alaska, most of that money from Washington, when the state decides where it should go, is not used for investment. Remember the Bridge to Nowhere that Palin backed, then said she said 'Thanks, but no thanks', but it was proven that she originally backed it, and then said 'no thanks' only when it becamse politically expedient to have done so?

So who's effectively 'printing more money'?

Posted by: critter69 | July 1, 2009 4:50 PM | Report abuse

It's called Republican political bankruptcy: it's the bottom of the barrel, poor buggers, and they haven't got the slightest clue what to do next. After all of these years threatening class war when the chips were down in federal elections; after supporting big tobacco all these years; after supporting litigation lawyers all these years; after being against health care for Americans for all of these decades; after supporting for a hundred years the out of control, gun lobbyists (from his cold dead hands, he said: well, didn't he die recently???), and on and on and on: after being on the wrong side of history in so many ways, for so many decades, the Republicans embracing of Palin serves only to show us how bewildered the members of that party really are. They haven't got the slightest clue what they are doing. Embracing her just demonstrates how lost they are. Cheney defending torture shows just how bankrupt they are. The thing that we must hope for is that the Republicans find a moral compass: if they do not, we risk the arising of a charismatic Evil One from within their ranks... Better Palin for now, I suppose, than the Evil One.

Posted by: DarylAtamanyk | July 1, 2009 4:50 PM | Report abuse

cschotta1 blathered: "LMAO! So Jesus wouldn't mind sucking the brains out of a fetus, eh?"
----------------------------------------
I don't care what Jesus would or wouldn't mind (he's dead, for starters), and neither does the US Constitution. Reread the first amendment. If separation of church and state doesn't agree with you, move to a theocracy. Stop trying to turn America into one.

Posted by: billy8 | July 1, 2009 4:49 PM | Report abuse

Some here really do think that we have a two party system, how silly is that LOL

The GOP screwed us all by pursuing bad policies, there is no question about it.
The democrats took over the house, senate and the white house, did the policy change? Only the tone changed, nothing else!

Aren't the wars still going on?
Aren't FISA, Patriot Act and co still in place?
Aren't the rich and well connected still getting TARP and stimilus packages and we are getting higher taxes? (See cap and trade and the TARP funds)
Aren't we still in a depression?
Isn't the welfare state still going on with wastful programs?
.... etc.

Policy never changes, get used to it.

Posted by: Rev6 | July 1, 2009 4:49 PM | Report abuse

repubsux wrote:
Where do they grow people like you? Seriously. How does your brain work, if it works at all? What's 2+2 on your planet?
--------------------------
This is precisely the delusion you put yourself in and then wonder why the world doesn't make sense. Obama is not qualified (resume wise) to be the POTUS, but he can lead a European nation. His mindset betrays the same. Palin doesn't need to be a rocket scientist because she isnt invested in hoarding power and being a Czar of Czars. When the president is req. to be an expert in economics, autmobile engineering, market analysis, foreign affairs, healthcare etc etc, then that means the American system of govt has stopped working. We don't need MIT rocket scientists in the white house (that's why we dont have exams to get into the white house). We need leaders who love this country with proven capacity to reform the system (and opposing their party when required). Smart people can be hired a dime a dozen out of univ campuses.

Posted by: NoWeCant | July 1, 2009 4:48 PM | Report abuse

I think the GOP should hire cschotta1 as a paid commentator. He would do a great job!

Posted by: koolkat_1960 | July 1, 2009 4:47 PM | Report abuse


cschotta1 wrote:
"Atleast she's 100% american!"

Oh yes, she's a real patriot. Here she is speaking at the 2008 Alaska Independence Party Convention in which her husband is a member. They advocate an in-state referendum which includes the option of Alaska becoming an independent nation.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZwvPNXYrIyI

Posted by: wiz_fan | July 1, 2009 4:47 PM | Report abuse

Cyros - What specific comments do you claim have been made that indicate hate for Sarah Palin? Most people correctly observe that she is shallow and unqualified for the national stage.

Posted by: gregp1 | July 1, 2009 3:10 PM
----------------------------------
So what if people hate her? She's an idiot who thinks she desrves to be president.
I love reading conservative posts about "intolerance." Yes, we're "discriminating" against stupid people who wish to be president. Deal with it.

Posted by: billy8 | July 1, 2009 4:46 PM | Report abuse

cschotta1 scoffed: "Imagine no liberals, what a wonderful world it would be!"

That would be right after the rapture, leaving all the conservatives behind, which should suit them fine since you can't take your guns and hatred with you.

Posted by: bevjims1 | July 1, 2009 4:46 PM | Report abuse

Such comments! "Self-flagellation", "incessant bloviations" and "propinquity to the intelligentsia"...I'm running with a fast crowd here.

Sarah Palin is more likely to become a hall of fame shortstop playing for the Nats than she is to become a successful POTUS.

Remember Bill Kristol's previous favorite vice presidential candidate: Dan Quayle. Kristol regarded him as "charismatic", proving only that Irving's son has a political tin ear.

No amount of spending on focus groups or what have you will ever make Quayle or Palin anything other than pretty boys and girls who are dumber than dirt.

High intelligence is surely not the most important scale upon which to measure a potential president's worth. However, you'd hope that abnormal lack of intelligence might be a disqualifier.

Posted by: douglaslbarber | July 1, 2009 4:46 PM | Report abuse

I'm loving watching this party of hicks and morons melting down. pass that popcorn.

Posted by: drindl | July 1, 2009 4:45 PM | Report abuse

cschotta1 blathered: "LMAO! So Jesus wouldn't mind sucking the brains out of a fetus, eh?"

When did Obama suck brains out of a fetus (oh this is getting tiresome).

cschotta1 blathered: "So Jesus wouldn't mind hanging around radical liberals who don't believe in GOD?"

So now you're saying Obama does not believe in God? You got some evidence for that? You might be surprised just how many libruals believe in God and follow His path, unlike conservatives who say they believe in God then fly off to Argentina to cheat on the wife.

cschotta1 blathered: "Keep up the ignorance lib-you dorks always make my day!"

Pointing out ignorance is much better, which is why, as you GOPers say, Dems like to "attack" Palin. It like shooting a duck in a barrel.

cschotta1 blathered: "LIBERALISM.....The gutless choice!"

At least liberals think before speaking instead of simply repeating what Fox News and their spiritual leaders tell them to. Speaking of which, you never answered the questions from the post you replied to here, but that was expected.


Posted by: bevjims1 | July 1, 2009 4:39 PM


Obama has no problem with his belief that sucking the brains out of a fetus-but Jesus, I'm sure would strongly disagree. Does Obama believe in god, maybe, depending on his religion. But YOUR party has a strong base that doesn't believe in God, which is why I believe Jesus wouldn't have anything to do with your radical party! Bring up Sanford is desperation lib. Where were you when we had a sexual predator in the White House for 8 years?
Looks like the magic NE GRO has lost his "magic", and there is nothing the liberal media can do to stand up this affirmative-action president.

LIBERALISM...Where "failure" is an option!

Posted by: cschotta1 | July 1, 2009 4:44 PM | Report abuse

dalva1 writes:
The Media distroyed President Bush.
The Media distroyed Michael Jackson.
The Media distroyed Sarah Palin...

-----------
Wow, could you have picked 3 more disfunctional human beings! We can feel bad for them and thier numerouse issues, but they destoyeed themselves by hubris, excess, and ignorance, respectively.

Posted by: sux123 | July 1, 2009 4:43 PM | Report abuse

The GOP pundits/operatives are divided between those that prefer a substantive President versus those that prefer a figurehead President. Kristol and his ilk prefer Palin because her lack of substance on the issues would give them more sway in a Palin administration – the power behind the throne. Bush 43 fit that mold whereas Bush 41 was a substantive President, which is why Kristol and his ilk consistently dissed Bush 41 as not a "real" conservative.

Posted by: wahaas57 | July 1, 2009 4:43 PM | Report abuse

cschotta1 asked: "Why is Algore unwilling to debate a real scientist? lol"

Because they all agree with him?

Posted by: bevjims1 | July 1, 2009 4:41 PM | Report abuse

1. NoWeCant wrote: "Dems are leaving the Senate in drones in 2010. That's all that matters in the short term."
bevjims1 wrote: You got some poll numbers showing that or did you just make it up through wishful thinking?

2. NoWeCant wrote: "Obama's white-guilt espousing magic will be pale in front of a conservative woman who loves the country for what it is."
bevjims1 wrote: Do you mean Real America? And from what I heard coming from Palin's mouth, she does not like America for what it is. She wants it to be a Christian nation with God in government, not separate. She likes some vision of America that never existed except in the minds of a few who think of America as white, christian and surrounded by non-white, non-christian enemies.

3. NoWeCant wrote: "Historicity on her side, Palin is an unbeatable candidate. Hence the vitriol against her."
bevjims1 wrote: Uh, she lost the 2008 election. And the vitriol is coming from the GOP. The Dems just laugh.

4, NoWeCant wrote: "Most of Obama's damage is also reversible, and she's the only one who has the courage to fight the establishment to do it."
bevjims1 wrote: What damage? The guy has only been in office 5 months?
------------------------------------------
1. Yea, cite any poll and the acceleration of the closing of the gap between what the Senate is doing and Obama's popularity and the trend pretty must puts the inflection point an yr or so ahead. The precedence being 1994. Only back then, Clinton was much more popular with conservatives and independents that Obama is (recent poll found Obama to be the most polarizing president). Amongst the independents his drop in approval has been the most harsh: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124570175501838333.html

2. That's your personal issue with conservatives, not with Palin.

3. Palin didn't lose 2008 cuz she was not on the ticket against Obama. There were only two weeks in the campaing in which McCain was ahead of Obama, which was right after he picked Palin and till he decided to endorse the stimulus.

4. Obama is in the process of doubling down on the mistakes that led to this crisis and is socializing the country with every bill the senate passes. The rules are damaging, and empirical evidence is enough to tell us what lies ahead. This needs to be reversed. Not many repubs have the courage to do this once they get to washington. He also seems to side in international matters with people who wield the stick against the poor and opressed. For the opressed, sometimes principles and a show of stand matters more than pragmatism. That's why even after Iraq invasion Bush's approval ratings in eastern europe, mid-asia and Africa was over 50% (while in europe it was down to under 20%).

Posted by: NoWeCant | July 1, 2009 4:40 PM | Report abuse

cschotta1 blathered: "LMAO! So Jesus wouldn't mind sucking the brains out of a fetus, eh?"

When did Obama suck brains out of a fetus (oh this is getting tiresome).

cschotta1 blathered: "So Jesus wouldn't mind hanging around radical liberals who don't believe in GOD?"

So now you're saying Obama does not believe in God? You got some evidence for that? You might be surprised just how many libruals believe in God and follow His path, unlike conservatives who say they believe in God then fly off to Argentina to cheat on the wife.

cschotta1 blathered: "Keep up the ignorance lib-you dorks always make my day!"

Pointing out ignorance is much better, which is why, as you GOPers say, Dems like to "attack" Palin. It like shooting a duck in a barrel.

cschotta1 blathered: "LIBERALISM.....The gutless choice!"

At least liberals think before speaking instead of simply repeating what Fox News and their spiritual leaders tell them to. Speaking of which, you never answered the questions from the post you replied to here, but that was expected.

Posted by: bevjims1 | July 1, 2009 4:39 PM | Report abuse

Rule of thumb: If Bill Kristol is for something, run from it as fast as you can.

Posted by: douglaslbarber | July 1, 2009 4:24 PM

Means "SO MUCH" coming from someone who follows around Algore and his global warming scam. Why is Algore unwilling to debate a real scientist? lol

Posted by: cschotta1 | July 1, 2009 4:32 PM
---------------------------------------
Question to conservatives not employed as CEO's of major energy companies: What benefit is their to you in denying global warming? Al Gore is far from the only person who acknowledges global warming.

Posted by: billy8 | July 1, 2009 4:38 PM | Report abuse

Keep slurping that kool-aid, rev6. This country was still in a depression in 1940, whatever your neo-con revisionist historians might tell you. Enough already with that nonsense. Only fools fall for that kind of ideological clap-trap. Sometimes the school books get it right, and this one instance where they did.

What matters most at this point, though, is who ran things the last 8 years leading up to last fall's historic collpase? Your side of the political spectrum. Surely you can't find a way to blame the left for this? Unregulated markets and unscrupulous business practices in the financial sector, all made possible by yer boy Dubya, got us into this mess. More of the same won't get us out. Obama might not be getting it right yet, just as Roosevelt didn't right off the bat, but I'll take their government activism any day over letting the market sort itself out. It never does, left to its own devices, and the next collapse is always just around the corner without some kind of government oversight. If you dispute that, in spite of all that's happened the past several months, then there's no reasoning with you. Your ideology is more important to you than the health of the country as a whole.

Posted by: mrbeer | July 1, 2009 4:35 PM | Report abuse

marmac5, your post was really on target.

The GOP has to decide if it wants to be a political party or a church. Let's face it: They really suck at being a church.

Otherwise they will become a regional party - the voice of heterosexual, white, southern fundies - and no one else.

Sad but inevitable unless they really want to be a church - in which case they need much better pastors. :)

Posted by: Brittman1 | July 1, 2009 4:34 PM | Report abuse

I can't help but wonder why the democrats/liberals continue to be so worked up over Palin.

Posted by: luca_20009 | July 1, 2009 4:27 PM
---------------------------------------
The same reason lots of Republicans, outside the religious right get so worked up about Palin: She's an idiot.

Posted by: billy8 | July 1, 2009 4:33 PM | Report abuse

You guys remember Norm and Cliff from "Cheers." Nice, down-to-earth guys- but do you want the to run the country? You Republicans- you need to try to do some reading, and a little thinking outside of your little box!

Posted by: interactidiomas | July 1, 2009 4:33 PM | Report abuse

Rule of thumb: If Bill Kristol is for something, run from it as fast as you can.

Posted by: douglaslbarber | July 1, 2009 4:24 PM

Means "SO MUCH" coming from someone who follows around Algore and his global warming scam. Why is Algore unwilling to debate a real scientist? lol

Posted by: cschotta1 | July 1, 2009 4:32 PM | Report abuse

Gee, I wonder who Sarah would choose as a running mate? That is, now that Mikey Jackson is ded.

Posted by: maphound | July 1, 2009 4:21 PM

Mikey Jackson was a black Barney Frank, and was just as ignorant when it came to financial responsibility. I bet she wouldn't choose a VP candidate who tells a paraplegic to "stand up", or informs the world where the VP secret bunker is located! Reality sux, eh lib?

"Imagine no liberals, what a wonderful world it would be!"

Posted by: cschotta1 | July 1, 2009 4:29 PM | Report abuse

The notion that the Democrats are terrified of Palin is self-delusional. I pray to God she's the GOP nominee in 2012.

The people who are truly terrified of Sarah are the GOP establishment who knows she can never be elected president.

Duh.

Posted by: Brittman1 | July 1, 2009 4:28 PM | Report abuse

nowecant writes:
Such attacks on Palin continue to confirm the dire status of Dems ahead

-----------
Um, the attacks were from REPUBLICANS - not Dems - read the article! Oh, I forgto your a Palin fan - have someone read it to you

Posted by: sux123 | July 1, 2009 4:27 PM | Report abuse

nowecant...Seek help. You need it. The level of delusion you display must make day-to-day life difficult

Posted by: willandjansdad1 | July 1, 2009 4:27 PM | Report abuse

NoWeCant wrote: "Palin, in any objective measure is far more qualified..."
*****************************************

Where do they grow people like you? Seriously. How does your brain work, if it works at all? What's 2+2 on your planet?

This is amazing to the point of being frightening! There really should be some sort of aptitude test before one is allowed to vote. No kidding!

Posted by: repubsux | July 1, 2009 4:27 PM | Report abuse

I can't help but wonder why the democrats/liberals continue to be so worked up over Palin.

Posted by: luca_20009 | July 1, 2009 4:27 PM | Report abuse

Charismatic, a word with many definitions, isn't one I'd use to describe Palin. Attractive, yes; sexy, somewhat; intelligent, doubtful. As a moderate, I've tried to understand why she has mesmerized so many hard-right Republicans. Is it her supposed family orientation; her declared support for individualism over socialism; her avowed dedication to the Constitution in its strictest form? Is it all of the above? I don't know and I don't care. What I do know are her shortcomings, of which there are many. The most damaging is her absolute ignorance of history and a miniscule world view. In my judgement, that's enough to disqualify her for high office.

Posted by: Diogenes | July 1, 2009 4:24 PM | Report abuse

Although most of the readers who have responded to Mr. Balz's article have focused their comments on Sarah Palin, I think that the most important part of the article concerns the probable dissension within the Republican Party. I, too, believe in a two-party system, with two viable parties to offer voters a genuine choice.

Governor Palin represents a segment of the Republican Party that finds diminishing support among many, if not most American citizens. The critical issue at this point, I believe, concerns the future of the Republican Party, itself, and not Governor's Palin's potential run for the presidency in 2012.

I am a Democrat, and my party includes liberals, moderates, centrists, conservatives, populists and others. It also welcomes those of diverse ethnicity, race, and economic status -- not always perfectly, but we try.

I think that the Republican Party needs to seek more diversity in all demographics and in its geography. What has become a regional party, controlled by religious and social conservatives, does not appeal to a broad spectrum of Americans. At one time, the Republican Party had conservatives, moderates, (social) liberals, populists and libertarians. They have weeded out the moderates and liberals, leaving a weaker party to contend on the national level.

I would be quite interested in reading more about the dissension within the Republican Party as it strives to define itself in the 21st century. Unfortunately, by focusing on Sarah Palin as a symbol of one element in that dissension, Mr. Balz reduces the impact of his major point.

Posted by: marmac5 | July 1, 2009 4:24 PM | Report abuse

just when you think you've seen the dumbest, the most ignorant, the most vile the rightwing has to offer, along comes someone like cschotta1.

Posted by: koolkat_1960 | July 1, 2009 4:24 PM | Report abuse

Rule of thumb: If Bill Kristol is for something, run from it as fast as you can.

Posted by: douglaslbarber | July 1, 2009 4:24 PM | Report abuse

Two things...

Palin is charismatic like a train wreck has charisma. She has already been defined, and not in a good way - Thanks Tina Fey and Katie Couric. What Palin ought to be doing is spending time and money redefining herself, her base will always be with her, she has no need to worry about them.

The GOP is basing their future on what happens to Obama. That may work but it's a thin reed upon which to base a strategy. The word is that Romney will be the nominee in 2012 because "It's the Economy, Stupid" But Romney is tarred with being a Wall Streeter (Bain Capital may not actually be located on Wall St but you get the idea.)

Posted by: Roofelstoon | July 1, 2009 4:24 PM | Report abuse

The best thing to happen to the Democratic party since Spiro Agnew...

Sarah Palin!

Run, Sarah, Run....Puleeeeze!

Posted by: willandjansdad1 | July 1, 2009 4:24 PM | Report abuse

Palin "Charismatic?" "Irresistible?"

She has that same look of smug self-righteous indignation that reminds one of his ex-wife.

Posted by: coloradodog | July 1, 2009 4:22 PM | Report abuse

NoWeCant wrote: "Such attacks on Palin continue to confirm the dire status of Dems ahead. You don't kick a dead horse"

Uh, that horse ain't dead...

NoWeCant wrote: "All this kicking from the media just reinstates the importance of not going to the left and keeping the repub party conservative."

How? That makes little sense.

NoWeCant wrote: "Dems are leaving the Senate in drones in 2010. That's all that matters in the short term."

You got some poll numbers showing that or did you just make it up through wishful thinking?

NoWeCant wrote: "Obama's white-guilt espousing magic will be pale in front of a conservative woman who loves the country for what it is."

Do you mean Real America? And from what I heard coming from Palin's mouth, she does not like America for what it is. She wants it to be a Christian nation with God in government, not separate. She likes some vision of America that never existed except in the minds of a few who think of America as white, christian and surrounded by non-white, non-christian enemies.

NoWeCant wrote: "Historicity on her side, Palin is an unbeatable candidate. Hence the vitriol against her."

Uh, she lost the 2008 election. And the vitriol is coming from the GOP. The Dems just laugh.

NoWeCant wrote: "Most of Obama's damage is also reversible, and she's the only one who has the courage to fight the establishment to do it."

What damage? The guy has only been in office 5 months?

Posted by: bevjims1 | July 1, 2009 4:22 PM | Report abuse

Gee, I wonder who Sarah would choose as a running mate? That is, now that Mikey Jackson is ded.

Posted by: maphound | July 1, 2009 4:21 PM | Report abuse

In a democracy, qualifications are judged by the people. This false sense of superiority by some only exposes their insecurities (so voting for a Harvard Grad establishes their propinquity to the intelligencia brand and a feel good factor). It's only through democracy that people who are not part of the establishment get a chance to rise. Palin, in any objective measure is far more qualified to be the POTUS, than Obama. But the other side dismisses this even without a deep consideration, using ridicule and parody, which for a liberal means the same thing that a tantrum does to a 5 yr old.

Posted by: NoWeCant | July 1, 2009 4:21 PM | Report abuse

Palin must win the prize for the most ignorant politician in America. Sean and Rush, irrespective of their ravings, are at least cognizant of public policy and familar with public policy issues.

Posted by: orange3 | July 1, 2009 4:20 PM | Report abuse

"the GOP elite" jfregus mentions was Cheney. McCain sold his soul and his campaign to Cheney for the endorsement of the extreme right-wing in return for allowing Bush's Rovian bullies to be in charge of the campaign again including bringing in Palin.

Posted by: coloradodog | July 1, 2009 4:18 PM | Report abuse

After all this self-flagellation and incessant bloviations, I'm just hoping and praying that the GOP remain stupid enough to nominate Palin in 2012. Please, please, please, please, pleeeeeeze.....

Posted by: repubsux | July 1, 2009 4:17 PM | Report abuse

cschotta1 wrote: "And do you think that Jesus would pal around Barack Hussein Obama, who thinks abortion is a right? lol"

Where in the bible did Jesus rage against abortion? Where did he say one was not to support abortion in any way? What commandments has Obama broken?

Don't attribute to Jesus things that were never attributed to Jesus except by present day radical preachers and priests who don't know the bible except to swing it like a sword with a false authority.


Posted by: bevjims1 | July 1, 2009 4:09 PM


LMAO! So Jesus wouldn't mind sucking the brains out of a fetus, eh? So Jesus wouldn't mind hanging around radical liberals who don't believe in GOD? Keep up the ignorance lib-you dorks always make my day!

LIBERALISM.....The gutless choice!

Posted by: cschotta1 | July 1, 2009 4:15 PM | Report abuse

mrbeer wrote: "The U.S. only finally pulled out of the depression due to the almost full employment created by World War II."

This is what you learned back in school, but it is WRONG, dead wrong.

The depression ended after the government cut spending by two thirds and taxes by one third.

What is Mr. Obama doing? Yeah, go figure it out, it flies in the face of those who voted for him, he is making the terrain ready for the neo-cons, they don't need to do anything but just wait.

Posted by: Rev6 | July 1, 2009 4:15 PM | Report abuse

Who cares what these creepy gay bashers do? They can all jump onto the ash heap of history as far as I'm concerned.

Oh, that's right. They are. :)

Posted by: Brittman1 | July 1, 2009 4:15 PM | Report abuse

What I don't understand is how those who fume over Palin can moon, pine, yearn and lust for Obama. Obama had less experience than Palin, associated with criminals such as Ayers, Acorn and Rezko, skip out on meaningful governance with his 'present' votes in the Illinois state senate. Yet those who fume and bluster over Obama still, after he runs up the national debt with horribly leglislatively crafted bailouts, Tarp and Stimulus with little to no oversight. Obama also is a complete train wreck on foreign policy. But somehow to these people, Obama is some laudable standard of purity and Palin is an excuse to hiss, spit, and get their meow meow claws out.

Well if you really want your answer about the Republican party, the answer is they must return to fiscal conservatism and stand up for the principals of our republic abroad. You see Obama, Pelosi, and Reid are absolutely incompetant with regard to fiscal matters, and if a fiscal conservative emerges, there will be a real contrast. That conservative must stand up for decentralized spending, less taxation, and moving the powers of government away from the federal level and back to the states and local level where widespread waste fraud and abuse will be harder to accomplish.

That conservative must also stand up for our values in our foreign policy. Right now Obama has adopted a blend into the background with the rest of the UN status, and gone with a policy of non egagement, tolerating tyrants and abuse for the sake of his worldwide public opnion rating. A conservative who articulates American values and demonstrates that he will stand up for those values even when its politically disadvantageous for him/her to do so would contrast strongly with Obama.

I think you will find accord on these two topic areas. The Republicans in 2012 must offer something more than Obama-lite.

Posted by: Wiggan | July 1, 2009 4:15 PM | Report abuse

John McCain lost the election because of the heavy handed manner that the GOP elite demanded he accept someone of political temperment of their choosing, i.e. Sarah Palin. Had John McCain been allowed by the GOP elite to have Joe Lieberman on his ticket he would have won.
It is for this reason I am never giving another dime to the GOP.

Posted by: jfregus | July 1, 2009 4:14 PM | Report abuse

We can only hope that the Republicans name Palin the head of the RNC so she can finish them off totally.

Posted by: mtravali | July 1, 2009 4:14 PM | Report abuse

While the neo-cons ruined the party and are still too stupid to figure out why they lost their way and are attacking each other and discussing technecalities, the great Dr. Ron Paul is working very hard with HR 1207 to audit the federal reserve and protect the US taxpayers, freedom and liberty.

JohnJuan/McPuppin for 2010? You got to be kiding me, stupid

Posted by: Rev6 | July 1, 2009 4:12 PM | Report abuse

Fellow Dems, have we learned nothing? Tens of millions of conservatives, many of them evangelicals, helped put Dubya in office in 2000, and ensured he stayed another 4 years in 2004. Qualifications mean very very little to these ideologues. A candidate could have all of the education and experience in the world; if they don't pass certain litmus tests, forget it. A collapsed economy is apparently preferable to a world where abortion is readily available. The economy always sorts itself out, so why worry about it?

Mindboggling.

The U.S. only finally pulled out of the depression due to the almost full employment created by World War II. What, exactly, do they think will rescue us this time? World War III?

Bottom line, don't underestimate the GOP, or their ability to appeal to the baser instincts in all of us. Somewhere there's another Karl Rove or Lee Atwater waiting in the wings to coarsen the the political discourse and spread their poison in service of returning the Republicans to power someday. Obama & co. have a huge mess to clean up, and thus far the results have been underwhelming. Business as usual is more like it.

Never forget that Americans, as a general rule, aren't the most patient of people, and tend toward the fickle in their political choices. The GOP might look toothless and hopelessly divided right now, but chances are they'll find a way out this wilderness, and sooner than many of us would like. Sneer at them at your peril. Palin looks like a poor choice as head of state for our country, but is she really that much less qualified than Dubya?

Posted by: mrbeer | July 1, 2009 4:11 PM | Report abuse

The drooling rightwingnut morons defending their pin-up queen must think guys like Mitt Romney are just going to roll over and let her have the nomination in 2012. You guys are dumber than a box of rocks.

Posted by: koolkat_1960 | July 1, 2009 4:10 PM | Report abuse

cschotta1 wrote: "And do you think that Jesus would pal around Barack Hussein Obama, who thinks abortion is a right? lol"

Where in the bible did Jesus rage against abortion? Where did he say one was not to support abortion in any way? What commandments has Obama broken?

Don't attribute to Jesus things that were never attributed to Jesus except by present day radical preachers and priests who don't know the bible except to swing it like a sword with a false authority.

Posted by: bevjims1 | July 1, 2009 4:09 PM | Report abuse

Democrats are terrified of Palin, so they keep bashing on her.

But after three more years of Obama dismantling America, Democrats will have a lot more serious problems than Palin.

Posted by: pkhenry | July 1, 2009 4:07 PM | Report abuse

I see Sarah Palin is in the news nearly every day. Maybe editors and political pundits are calculating that they can run her into oblivion.

Apparently, she is so unappealing that Runner's World magazine decided to run a feature article of the fit and trim Alaska governor in its latest edition. I suppose it would be liberal blasphemy to suggest that the photo is extremely flattering -- even appealing.

Shame on Runner's World!

Haven't their editors heard that Palin is just a Grand Old Party pawn? According to mouthpieces for the Fourth Estate, she's a stool pigeon, a conservative figure head--a token woman.

Personally, I don't see it. Looks to me like the political "experts" are either terribly mistaken, or they're extremely worried about her.

If they don't stop Palin's momentum, she could do to the current occupants of the nation's White House what Ronald Reagan did to Jimmy Carter and his family in 1980.

The parallels are uncanny: double-digit unemployment, high-deficit spending, crazy inflation, declining wages, Chrysler bankruptcy, general sense of gloom and lack of pride among many Americans. Even Iran's leader is auditioning for the villain in the coming remake: "It's 1979 All Over Again," which resumes filming in roughly 18 months.

Perhaps Palin should ease the minds of all those soapbox "journalists" and reassure them that she has no intention of playing the lead role as the first American woman to occupy the Oval Office.

Then again, maybe she likes the coverage. The word among those in the know is that millions of Palin supporters are whispering every day, "Run baby, run!"

Posted by: euclidzoo | July 1, 2009 4:07 PM | Report abuse

Such attacks on Palin continue to confirm the dire status of Dems ahead. You don't kick a dead horse. All this kicking from the media just reinstates the importance of not going to the left and keeping the repub party conservative. Dems are leaving the Senate in drones in 2010. That's all that matters in the short term. Obama's white-guilt espousing magic will be pale in front of a conservative woman who loves the country for what it is. Historicity on her side, Palin is an unbeatable candidate. Hence the vitriol against her. Most of Obama's damage is also reversible, and she's the only one who has the courage to fight the establishment to do it.

Posted by: NoWeCant | July 1, 2009 4:06 PM | Report abuse

When you look at Palin, her statments reflecting her ability to understand complex issues like economy, foreign policy, national security etc.. and her attempts to polarize the nation by talking about which areas in the country constitute Real America and which area doesn't, then you got to ask yourself one imporant question as a responbile citizen i.e is she even qualified to be in politics in the first place? There are industries where she might have a better talent. How about following in the foot steps of people like Jenna Jameson or Sunrise Adams or Alexis Texas who know where their talent lies.

Posted by: nri1998 | July 1, 2009 4:04 PM | Report abuse

The Republicans need to find someone with a brain, not someone who butchers the English language everytime she opens her mouth. And knock it off with all the Jesus talk. Jesus would never have supported the NRA, Rush Limbaugh, nor the current GOP!

Posted by: GenuineRisk | July 1, 2009 3:55 PM

And do you think that Jesus would pal around Barack Hussein Obama, who thinks abortion is a right? lol

Posted by: cschotta1 | July 1, 2009 4:03 PM | Report abuse

Please oh please nominate St. Sarah in 2012!!

Puleeeze!

:-)

Posted by: toritto | July 1, 2009 4:03 PM | Report abuse

That a national political party would even jokingly entertain the idea of putting its fortunes in the hands of an intellectual lightweight like Sarah Palin is baffling and horrifying. Didn't they get the message after the last half-smart good ol' boy they championed? As a gone-but-not-forgotten statesman once said,"Fool me once shame on you, fool me twice, won't get fooled again."

Following the Republican descent to the bottom is like following the worst team in the league. Get a real team guys.

Posted by: dccamp68 | July 1, 2009 4:03 PM | Report abuse

By 2012 the only thing we will remember about Palin is her penchant for sordid little imbroglios, fueds and catfights. She manages to stay in the headlines with nonsense because it is purely entertaining.

Posted by: nekidcivilservnt | July 1, 2009 4:02 PM | Report abuse

post_reader_in_wv wrote: "The attacks on her family (leave them OUT OF IT!) are particularly inappropriate."

I agreed with your post except for the above comment. I would agree with it if Palin had not brought her family out as part of her campaign. But I was particularly troubled with her bringing out her newborn at midnight into a loud convention hall. And bringing out the boy who got her daughter pregnant was particularly appauling especially how it seems the wedding plans were all fake. Palin purposly put her family in front of America as an attempt to show how good she was. It cannot be called unfair to say her family cannot be scrutinized after she did that.

Posted by: bevjims1 | July 1, 2009 4:02 PM | Report abuse

The Republicans need to find someone with a brain, not someone who butchers the English language everytime she opens her mouth. And knock it off with all the Jesus talk. Jesus would never have supported the NRA, Rush Limbaugh, nor the current GOP!

Posted by: GenuineRisk | July 1, 2009 3:55 PM | Report abuse

Hey Dalva1. Wipe the froth off your chin and take a breath, ya lunatic!

Posted by: repubsux | July 1, 2009 3:55 PM | Report abuse

Oh how we soon forget. Does anyone remember how Biden was cautioned in his debate with her not to attack, not to look like he was beating up on her? Does anyone remember the pulling of punches? Sarah left herself open to so much that could be attacked but the democrats did not want to make her failures the main attraction, they wanted to focus on McCain, which was the correct strategy.

That will change if Palin runs in 2012. She can be tutored all she wants but she can barely run a 3rd world state. And there is so much on tape from the 2008 election, her talking to a child about what the VP does, which was completely wrong, her talking about a Palin administration, and that wonderful interview with Katie. Palin got off light considering how much she failed. If she runs for president it will be like slaughtering a turkey, something Palin is very familiar with.

Posted by: bevjims1 | July 1, 2009 3:54 PM | Report abuse

The conservative commentary here would be hilarious - except that it shows so graphically how brain-dead and angry conservatives are. I am frightened by their rage and incoherence, because such people normally react with sociopathic violence.

Posted by: novgorodva | July 1, 2009 3:53 PM | Report abuse

Full disclosure first: I am a centrist Democrat.

I have decried the intemperate descriptions of Gov. Palin (calling her an idiot or "Caribou Barbie" demeans those who do so, just as is true for those who call Pres. Obama a chimp or something similarly offensive). The attacks on her family (leave them OUT OF IT!) are particularly inappropriate. But it is NOT hate-speech to describe Gov. Palin as dangerously ill-prepared and consequently unfit for national office. Should she run again without having changed remarkably for the better, I would be adamant and tireless in my opposition to her.

In the meantime, her critics should refrain from the insulting language--her "fair-game" shortcomings are conspicuous, numerous, and important, so you don't need to resort to personal insults. And her supporters should seriously re-examine that support (do you REALLY want her finger on the nuclear trigger???) and not denounce ALL criticism of her as hate-speech.

Posted by: post_reader_in_wv | July 1, 2009 3:51 PM | Report abuse

"Charismatic?" "Irresistible?" Sarah Palin?!? NO WAY.

Posted by: WI-Simone | July 1, 2009 3:51 PM | Report abuse

cschotta1
“As opposed to someone that doesn't know how many states there are?”
-----------------------------------------------------
No; as opposed to someone who doesn’t know what magazines she reads (if any). Moreover; Obama knew full well how many states there are. He gave the number of primaries…as opposed to the number of states. But I guess it’ll take someone with common sense to figure that one out.


Posted by: BasicInstinct | July 1, 2009 3:34 PM

And thinking that growing the government, printing more money and tripling our debt is somehow going to bring financial growth is just another mistake? Face it lib, your BOY, the failed community organizer is fastly becoming another Jimma II. But what did you expect by voting for someone with no qualifications, except that he's a black muslim and wrote 2 books!

LIBERALISM....A true mental disorder!!

Posted by: cschotta1 | July 1, 2009 3:51 PM | Report abuse

Palin, an intolerant, evangelical Huckabee, is too polarizing. Why can't rational minds in the Republican Party see that? (if there are any left after the hijacking of the Party by Limbaugh hate radio and RNC Fox News)

Rove brought Palin in as a futile, last minute attempt to go to the neochristian well again for votes.

She's now a relic of more wedge politics. Democrats can only hope Republicans, in their inimitable style, keep doing the same thing over and over again even if they know it doesn't work.

Posted by: coloradodog | July 1, 2009 3:49 PM | Report abuse

There is no way to sugar-coat this non-debate or make intellectual sense of it. There is none. Palin can't complete an English sentence. There are immigrant Mexicans in LA who could do better in English.

Republicans who hang their hopes of Palin's sex appeal and her anti-abortion nonsense demonstrate the problem of how clueless they are in political ideas. But this is not news: Gingrich, Cantor, Boehmer, whomever, it is the same lost-cause sound: chimes.

The Palin detractors and her supporters are alike: they still believe in the misapplied "survival of the fittest" interpretation of Darwinism. That means that today they would rather hang with Bernie Madoff and Citibank than try to find practical solutions for Americas future.

Republicans = Dinosaurs! That's not Palin's fault.

Posted by: walden1 | July 1, 2009 3:46 PM | Report abuse

"Irresistible" indeed! So much so that I cannot resist changing the TV channel whenever she appears on TV.

On the other hand, she is the gift that keeps on giving. By al means, let the Repubs keep her in the spotlight.

Posted by: Gatsby1 | July 1, 2009 3:45 PM | Report abuse

Nothing we know about Sarah Palin suggests she could successfully manage the local diner. Does she have any record of personal achievement where she successfully exercised her judgment about anything significant and substantive ? Don't say being elected a governor meets that test. It could but that requires examination of whether she actually makes good decisions as governor or whether she just does as she is told by smart aides.
That someone so inarticulate about substance is thought of as capable for high office by the republican party tells you everything you need to know about the republican party.

Posted by: BacktobasicsRob | July 1, 2009 3:41 PM | Report abuse

None, none of this is about Sarah Palin, much less GOP. It is about OBAMA! Liberal Media cowardly still keep giving this Celebrity-president a free pass but surely alredy feeling guilty - and where they discount their guilty? By referencing why MacCain didnt win. By now 80% of America wish MacCain had won!
But can the Media acknowledge that??

When the Media were out there to distroy not only MacCain, but the entire Palin family and all GOPs,with all possible abuses it was said it was Free Speech!

Free Speech?

The Media distroyed President Bush.
The Media distroyed Michael Jackson.
The Media distroyed Sarah Palin...but she
is not Dead! thats the difference.

The Media will, YES, be very very dead!
Mark my word!
America is fed-up with you MEDIA!
Your end is a very tragic one! mark my words!
You should worrie about YOU, not Sarah Palin.

Posted by: Dalva1 | July 1, 2009 3:41 PM | Report abuse

There is no way to sugar-coat this non-debate or make intellectual sense of it. There is none. Palin can't complete an English sentence. There are immigrant Mexicans in LA who could do better in English.

Republicans who hang their hopes of Palin's sex appeal and her anti-abortion nonsense demonstrate the problem of how clueless they are in political ideas. But this is not news: Gingrich, Cantor, Boehmer, whomever, it is the same lost-cause sound: chimes.

The Palin detractors and her supporters are alike: they still believe in the misapplied "survival of the fittest" interpretation of Darwinism. That means that today they would rather hang with Bernie Madoff and Citibank than try to find practical solutions for Americas future.

Republicans = Dinosaurs! That's not Palin's fault.

Posted by: walden1 | July 1, 2009 3:39 PM | Report abuse

keep her on the front pages how else would we know what a wonderful mother, leader and grandmother she is. palin is the female face of the repug family values platform.she can't control her teen-age daughter, allowing levi to live in the home for easy access.any party who allows limpaw to be the spokesman for them, deserves randy sanford,the poster child of repugs.

Posted by: ninnafaye | July 1, 2009 3:29 PM

Some cheese for your WHINE? Family values? Is sucking the brains out of a living, breathing fetus considered family values in your preverted world?

Utopia=No more liberals!

Posted by: cschotta1 | July 1, 2009 3:35 PM | Report abuse

cschotta1
“As opposed to someone that doesn't know how many states there are?”
-----------------------------------------------------
No; as opposed to someone who doesn’t know what magazines she reads (if any). Moreover; Obama knew full well how many states there are. He gave the number of primaries…as opposed to the number of states. But I guess it’ll take someone with common sense to figure that one out.

Posted by: BasicInstinct | July 1, 2009 3:34 PM | Report abuse

Consider where Palin would be if she were not attractive and sexy looking and did not appeal to the GOP base's baser instincts of nativism, "no nothingness", and fundamental religiosity?

She is a narcissitic, ambitious politician who has now been exposed to power, wealth, and adulation. She ain't going to go quietly into that dark Wasilla nght!

Posted by: ponderer | July 1, 2009 3:34 PM | Report abuse

JohnDinHouston | July 1, 2009 3:08 PM

The largest State in the Union!!!!!? Alaska has less population than Broward County. While being the leader of a sparsely populated state does not disqualify one from higher office, it is not the same as being governor of highly populated states like Illinois and Florida, where governors are confronted with complex issues that Ms. Palin could not get into her empty head. Please do not insult our intelligence with your meaningless statement.

Posted by: Henry_of_BrowardCounty | July 1, 2009 3:33 PM | Report abuse

keep her on the front pages how else would we know what a wonderful mother, leader and grandmother she is. palin is the female face of the repug family values platform.she can't control her teen-age daughter, allowing levi to live in the home for easy access.any party who allows limpaw to be the spokesman for them, deserves randy sanford,the poster child of repugs.

Posted by: ninnafaye | July 1, 2009 3:29 PM | Report abuse

Fox Noise's Bill O'Reilly's comment that Sarah Palin just needed 'tutoring' to bring her up to speed on holding the highest office in our land reminds me of the statement George W. Bush made when he said that it was important for children to learn how to read so that they could pass literacy tests.

If the neoconstipates who make up the Republican party can pull their heads out of their own backsides long enough to see how stupid they make themselves appear, maybe they could be looked upon as having more credibility than at present. Four more years!

Posted by: queenofromania | July 1, 2009 3:28 PM | Report abuse

cschotta1 wrote:
"Atleast she's 100% american!"
---------------------------------------------

I would say she’s 50% American…because most American politicians KNOW what policies are in their own country.


Posted by: BasicInstinct | July 1, 2009 3:26 PM

As opposed to someone that doesn't know how many states there are?

Posted by: cschotta1 | July 1, 2009 3:28 PM | Report abuse

cschotta1 wrote:
"Atleast she's 100% american!"
---------------------------------------------

I would say she’s 50% American…because most American politicians KNOW what policies are in their own country.

Posted by: BasicInstinct | July 1, 2009 3:26 PM | Report abuse

As a candidate for President, or even US Senator for that matter, Sarah Palin would be punching way above her weight class (politically speaking).

She is inherently incapable of exercising the judgment needed to think, decide and act in the name of a national constituency. It is not a function of her gender or affiliation. The GOP may well have other women in their ranks who can exercise government authority with prudence, foresight and diligence.

Palin is a political dilettante (charismatic yes, but a dilettante nonetheless) who has tasted the elixir of power and WANTS MORE. The admixture of inexperience, willful ignorance and a zealous will to power in Palin's case amounts to a caustic, corrosive and destabilizing agent in American politics, especially within the GOP.

Given all that the GOP claims to stand for, I would hope that its members resist her siren call that would wreck not just their party, but (God forbid) our nation were circumstances to favor here election to high office.

As someone who supported Obama last November, I hope the GOP fields a candidate worthy of the mantle of leadership they seek. A 2012 campaign that pits Obama against a strong (and worthy) contender leaves the nation stronger for the effort.

Posted by: spotter_tx | July 1, 2009 3:26 PM | Report abuse

"Her performance in the campaign created a wide gulf in public opinion between those who found her fresh and appealing and those who found her shallow and unready."

But...but...what about those of us who found her an unprincipled liar, with a hugely engorged ego, stuffed with proud ignorance. What about us?

Posted by: nicekid | July 1, 2009 3:26 PM | Report abuse

I just have to respond to NMR1989 | July 1, 2009 2:57 PM:

Sarah Palin would put the rethug where they belong allright; in the toilet. She is a brainless and spiteful oaf who would do whatever to get into power. She said our president was palling around with terrorists. She is so spiteful that majority of Alaskans just want her out of their lives. See the poll conducted by Anchorage Daily News. I truly wish the retards would make her the head of their party. Imagine telling the women of this country how they must treat their own bodies. That will sure win you votes!

Posted by: Henry_of_BrowardCounty | July 1, 2009 3:25 PM | Report abuse

A 'football' with buttons'!? .... Oh! How cute.

Posted by: deepthroat21 | July 1, 2009 3:25 PM | Report abuse

keep her on the front pages how else would we know what a wonderful mother, leader and grandmother she is. palin is the female face of the repug family values platform.she can't control her teen-age daughter, allowing levi to live in the home for easy access.any party who allows limpaw to be the spokesman for them, deserves randy sanford,the poster child of repugs.

Posted by: ninnafaye | July 1, 2009 3:24 PM | Report abuse

Watching Palin on TV is like watching a speeding car flying off a bridge. You want to cover your eyes, but then you miss something.

Posted by: BasicInstinct | July 1, 2009 3:22 PM | Report abuse

Palin is too controversial for the good of her party. There's trouble each time the spotlight turns back on her. GOPs need to drop her like they did at the recent RNC meeting. They need to cut her loose and focus on someone qualified and not so abrasive to the general public or they'll lose 2010 and 2012 too.

Posted by: buzziea | July 1, 2009 3:21 PM | Report abuse

Atleast she's 100% american!

Posted by: cschotta1 | July 1, 2009 3:19 PM | Report abuse

Sarah Palin has an "irrestible personality"? Yeah, and so did any other nut-job with a stage presence. She is no more irrestible than Hitler on yet another History Channel episode.

Posted by: 0nl00k3r | July 1, 2009 3:17 PM | Report abuse

Cyros - What specific comments do you claim have been made that indicate hate for Sarah Palin? Most people correctly observe that she is shallow and unqualified for the national stage.

Posted by: gregp1 | July 1, 2009 3:10 PM | Report abuse

I do know that IS Jake D's position, so you don't have to answer, if you're out there, Jake.

Posted by: JohnDinHouston | July 1, 2009 3:09 PM | Report abuse

Really, let's not call names, please. Ms. Palin was able to rise to the position of Governor in the largest state of the country. However, any one who sees Governor Palin as a future President of the United States is determined to place rigid ideology over competence. Essentially, there are a fair number of people in this country who would be glad to elect just about anyone as President, as long as they take a stand against abortion. Is this really the fulcrum that you want the United States' future to revolve around?

Posted by: JohnDinHouston | July 1, 2009 3:08 PM | Report abuse

"She is an irresistible personality..."

Indeed, I can never resist changing the channel whenever she makes an appearance on TV!

The Reps still don't get it. The US had a crassly ignorant mor*on in the White House for eight long years. The last thing the country needs is a loud-mouthed intellectual midget anywhere near the presidency.

Posted by: Gatsby1 | July 1, 2009 3:04 PM | Report abuse

While I'm sure sarcasm makes points, do well to remember how much it rubs the wrong way.

I'll bluntly state, the Republican party handled the election wrong- but I wasn't a fan of the Democratic run for presidency either. Personally, I think a LOT of the current legistlation is premature since we really should be focusing on our economy first and foremost- he seems to be focusing on things that in my opinion could potentially hurt our current position. I really don't think the president is thinking ahead much more than what his determined agenda shows him. I think his lack of flexiblity and his inexperience is hurting him. A rush of popularity pushed him into office- where I'm sure no one even once glanced at his political platform. (and I mean legit looked it up)

Palin wouldn't have been much better - truth. That doesn't mean she won't have learned lessons between now and then. Bash her all you want now- but perhaps she could prove us all wrong yet. The lady can attract attention, that's for sure. Playing it right, she could put the Republicans back to where they need to be.

Posted by: NMR1989 | July 1, 2009 2:57 PM | Report abuse

I am an independent that wants to have a return of the two party system. Since the time of Tom Delay's arrival as far as I am concerned the Republican Party in Washington has not been a viable option. Right now we need health care reform and the only thing Republicans talk about is what they do not want.

Well I want to say that a Republican Party that all bands together and will not criticize Rush when he expresses unpatriotic thoughts is a party that is run by martinets which should be in our armed forces but not in our government.

Posted by: Gator-ron | July 1, 2009 2:53 PM | Report abuse

"They remember what happened after Bill Clinton won the White House and how Republicans hunkered down, created a wall of resistance to Clinton's agenda (particularly health care) and successfully stoked the anti-government sentiment around the country."

That conduct by the GOP was childish, spiteful and not in the best interest of the country, which should now be obvious to everyone after the Bush years. I think it has come back to haunt the Republicans.

Posted by: asoders22 | July 1, 2009 2:53 PM | Report abuse

JakeD - Care to chime in and defend your prior claims that Sarah Palin is more qualified than both Biden or Obama? We await your illustrious intellect...

Posted by: gregp1 | July 1, 2009 2:43 PM
=====================
Biden might be a nice guy but he's way in over his head.

He makes so many gaffes he was been banished to the white house basement to conjure up deceptions for the non-stimulus. This for the person touted as great foreign policy credentials.

I'm no big Palin fan since I'm fiscally conservative but socially moderate but it's amusing seeing the intolerance, loathing, hate, and double standard hypocrisies she draws out of liberals.

Posted by: Cryos | July 1, 2009 2:51 PM | Report abuse

The Republicans opposed to Palin having a future in the party know that the party can not survive another unqualified president. They are not even sure it will survive the previous one. They are desperately trying to stop the lemmings' march to the cliff.

Posted by: lostinthemiddle | July 1, 2009 2:47 PM | Report abuse

Gee what a shock all the mentally disturbed liberals posting hate posts against Palin.

How about you go comment on Honduras's removal of their aspiring dictator and how Obama won't meddle with Iran yet will condemn Honduras following their constitution because a lefty is being ousted.

Obama is dropping the ball time after time and soon only people like on this thread will be blindly following.

Posted by: Cryos | July 1, 2009 2:47 PM | Report abuse

JakeD - Care to chime in and defend your prior claims that Sarah Palin is more qualified than both Biden or Obama? We await your illustrious intellect...

Posted by: gregp1 | July 1, 2009 2:43 PM | Report abuse

Put me down as one more (D) who doesn't want to kill the goose that keeps laying golden eggs at blinding speed.

I hope the GOP keeps Sarah Palin around FOREVER.

Posted by: daler1 | July 1, 2009 2:42 PM | Report abuse

I love it! Keep this idiot in the news as long as possible -- along with other GOP idiots like Ensign, Sanford, Cheney, etc.

The Republicans will not regain power for decades, if ever, with this collection of clowns as the public face of the party.

Posted by: koolkat_1960 | July 1, 2009 2:39 PM | Report abuse

Yes, please, keep palin on the national stage!

Compared to the other GOP "leaders" like; Steele, Sanford, Limbaugh, Gingrich, Romney, Ensign, Piyush, Pawlenty, Vitter, Craig, Ted Haggard, she actually looks good!

Yes, I'm begging ya, keep her very much in the picture GOP!

Posted by: Heerman532 | July 1, 2009 2:38 PM | Report abuse

What, is the Washington Post now a propaganda arm of the Republican Party? I didn't think that Fox needed any help. Sarah Palin is an "irresistible personality"? She may be irresistible to barn flies, but that's about it. The American people expressed their views about her in the last election. She's a low-caliber dunce. End of story.

Posted by: Bob22003 | July 1, 2009 2:35 PM | Report abuse

i think palin and bachman from minnesota would be great just think of all the SNL we could enjoy.

Posted by: donaldtucker | July 1, 2009 2:33 PM | Report abuse

YES! YES! YES! Sarah Palin is a USA hating secessionist member of the Alaska First (AKIP) Party that publicly claims secession as a primary party goal.

EXACTLY THE PERSON AMERICA NEEDS TO HEAD UP THE REPUBLICAN PARTY AND BE THE STANDARD BEARER OF FAILED NEOCON IDEOLOGY!

Hurray for America!!! Palin is going to take down the republican vote to under 5% of the electorate!

Posted by: onestring | July 1, 2009 2:31 PM | Report abuse

Wow, look at her tear apart her own party. Just think what she would do to -- er, for -- the nation.

Posted by: nodebris | July 1, 2009 2:14 PM | Report abuse

The appeal of an idiot (Sorry Palin) is that she allows others to suspend logic in favor of thier preconcieved notions. This is the same appeal of Rush Limbaugh, FOX news etc. Emotionally appealing to the belligerent faithful, yet devoid of substance and intellect. I say keep her alive and the dems shall prosper further.

Posted by: gregp1 | July 1, 2009 2:13 PM | Report abuse

Sooner or later, if Palin wants to be taken seriously she’s going to have to appear on “Meet the Press”.

Biden’s done MTP at least three times.

Palin on MTP is going to be comedy gold and fuel “Saturday Night Live” for weeks.

But clearly, Sarah Palin sees politics as a never-ending gravytrain for her, her chronically unemployed husband, her close friends and her porch full of hillbilly children.

Posted by: republican_disaster | July 1, 2009 2:05 PM | Report abuse

What is the appeal of an idiot? They are easy to control.

Posted by: hamishdad | July 1, 2009 1:57 PM | Report abuse

How can any serious minded Republican consider this woman as a viable candidate for public office? What is the appeal of an idiot?

Posted by: buddecj | July 1, 2009 1:37 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company