Posted on 07/09/2009 4:47:34 PM PDT by curth
hey Say/We Say
The debate over Palin is sort of ossified.
The Left continues to ridicule her accent, family, and middling roots. The Right enjoys such authenticity-but enjoys even more the hysteria it incurs in liberals.
Will it Be Politics or Money?
But lost in all of this is whether she is up to national politics, or simply wishes to capitalize (an Oprah-like talk show?) on her sizable financial potential. On the one hand, Palin is obviously bright. Few could raise a family without capital in Wasilla, and within a decade end up as Governor of a large state-whose protocols hinged on an old-boy network where politicians accommodated oil and mineral interests.
On the other hand, a mother of five, knee-deep in local politics, without money and leisure, is not going to be reading Gibbon for perspective, or spending the afternoon perusing Foreign Affairs. Nor is she going to remember a quip that her Prof at the Kennedy school once offered years ago. Nor is she going to recall clever repartee at a Georgetown dinner party from one grandee to another.
She has natural gifts-stamina, earthy grit, sensitivity to what most Americans go through raising a family on a limited budget, practicality from working with her hands in a natural world. All that is no small beer. Look at Truman’s various experiences in Missouri.
No Way 2012-Maybe 2016, 2020?
But if, a big if, she decides to become a national political figure, Palin should use these next few years (in addition to making some money to support her family) to travel and read widely in the manner that a Reagan did in his wilderness period. She has natural intelligence and is curious. I think most would like to see her do another Couric interview five years from now
(Excerpt) Read more at pajamasmedia.com ...
Sorry. I like Hanson but he's trying to say, in a very nice way, that Sarah shouldn't think of 2012. Poppycock. Go into a wilderness period like Reagan? Sorry but there is no need to go on a seven year course. The Couric interview is way overblown and in fact is a dishonest benchmark to use. Sarah was feisty in that interview because she knew she was not only being hypocritically treated as a conservative but also as a conservative woman.
Hanson demonstrates why we need Palin. There is no other conservative out there, not even Hanson, who normally is bright, who gets it.
And what’s “it”?
Well, if you have to ask, then you probably agree with Hanson, that Palin should go off to the “wilderness” and let the rest of us wait while Obama builds is dictatorship and not a single other Republican, or a single other conservative, says a word about it.
FU, Victor. FU.
And what’s “it”?
Well, if you have to ask, then you probably agree with Hanson, that Palin should go off to the “wilderness” and let the rest of us wait while Obama builds is dictatorship and not a single other Republican, or a single other conservative, says a word about it.
It's kind of impressive that you can write so much without actually saying anything.
You’re right. I wrote “Obama builds is dictatorship” when I should have written “Obama builds his dictatorship”.
Thanks for spotting my error.
It’s kinda impressive that you land here in February and are already questioning a bonified FReeper that’s been here for almost 9 years. Did you argue and shout at your dad from the children’s table when you were a kid? BTW, are they using MACs or PCs there in Chicago?
You need it spelled out for you, in simple terms. Right?
The point is we need Palin now, because nobody else is good enough.
The point is that Palin isn't good enough either. There's nobody good enough right now, and that is the problem.
Palin supporters are no different from Romney supporters; they both want their candidates to run, and will probably will get their wish.
But those candidates are going to lose, because they aren't good enough, and living in fantasy land isn't going to make it so.
I thought this was a political discussion forum. Is there a caste of brahmins here who are beyond criticism?
If you think Palin isn’t good enough, you don’t know anything.
If you don’t provide support for your argument, you have as much credibility as a birth certificate scribbled in crayon.
What is Palin missing, according to your analysis? I expect your answer to be in terms of her innate and/or learned qualities—these are the two important categories you should focus on.
Be specific.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.