You can love Palin without wanting her to be president (Journolist Alert)

Politico ^ | 8/30/10 | Journolist Liberal Ben Smith, pissant's latest hero

[pissant]

Understood. But I also recall this poster’s unequivocal praise of Palin in the past.

[kcvl]

Prissy Ben Smith, Politico & JournOlister (right)

A tale of one “journalist” and two news stories:

On one hand, we have the story of J. Christian Adams, a Department of Justice whistleblower who testified on the record to ongoing and systemic discrimination at the DOJ. As of today, a good faith search of the Politico site fails to show the name of said whistleblower having ever appeared anywhere on Politico. This includes Ben Smith’s 1200-plus word spread about a single conservative he scraped up who believes the whole Black Panther story is silly (which appears to be the only coverage of the story Politico has bothered with).

On the other hand, we have Former Alaska Governor Sarah Palin mangling a word on Twitter. This very same Ben Smith not only found this Tweet worth mentioning, but worth mentioning in a headline where he linked to a blogger who accused Palin of “joining forces” with the “anti-Muslim Bigot Brigade.”

I am simply pointing this glaring hypocrisy and bad judgment out for the benefit of Mr. Smith and his editors who will hopefully soon wake up to the fact that this kind of “reporting” makes them look horribly dishonest – like left-wing ideologues disguised as journalists who have chosen sides.

That can’t be who they are… right?

BigJournalism.com

[ansel12]

I don’t know who the poster is, I saw what I saw on this thread.

[stephenjohnbanker]

Good list.

[r9etb]

There aren’t many Ronald Reagans, unfortunately. I can’t think of **any** politican on **either** side that would compare well in that litmus test you have set up for Ms. Palin.

The thing is, you set her up for comparison to Reagan by suggesting that she could be "one of the best foreign policy leaders and CinCs we have ever had."

Which naturally leads one to ask what qualifications had Reagan demonstrated by the time he ran for President.... he'd done far, far more than Palin has done so far.

Did you think W Bush was a satisfactory president, especially in foreign policy? Did he have the experience he needed as a weak governor of the state of Texas?

I do think he was more than satisfactory. But you need to be careful when you try to denigrate his time as a "weak" governor of Texas.

He was very effective as governor, and part of that effectiveness involved working with and through a notoriously fractious legislature -- invaluable political experience that Ms. Palin currently does not have. As testament to his effectiveness, he was actually the first governor in Texas history to be elected to a second consecutive 4-year term (in a 69% landslide), though he left the second term early to run for president.

His broader background was also helpful: he ran several oil companies, the Texas Rangers, and also his father's 1988 presidential campaign.

[Nervous Tick]

Fair enough.

So, who *do* you like for POTUS in 2012? And why?

[Nervous Tick]

>> Prissy Ben Smith, Politico & JournOlister (right)

What the hell is Gaybo on the left doing with his *hand*??!? ROFL!

[pissant]

It’s a tiny fraction.

[pissant]

He’s got a man-purse.

[stephenjohnbanker]

Tiny, but it is a good cross section of the Palin cult.

[pissant]

I left out the ones with ‘threats’. That deserves it’s own smokey backroom thread. ROFL.

[r9etb]

So, who *do* you like for POTUS in 2012? And why?

I'd like to see Haley Barbour run. He's a reasonably solid conservative, has a strong political background, and has showed himself to be a very able governor in difficult times (e.g., his Katrina response). His term as head of the RNC was notably successful. He's seen the inside of White House operations, having worked for Reagan for a time.

A downside of a Barbour candidacy is that he's really only ever been in politics in one form or another. Politically, his lobbying activities would be a definite liability.

Still, of all the people out there, he's probably the one who's best-equipped actually to step into the presidency without having to learn too much on the job.

[EveningStar]

Remarkable.

[MaggieCarta]

MaggieCarta,
Backbencher for the Opposition

Voting "Present!"

[EveningStar]

At least (unlike me) you had the presence of mind to save the links. You even found the one with the Patton comparison! LOL!

[pissant]

Yet, they ain’t cultists, dern nabbit.

[Nervous Tick]

Once elected, Barbour would not be a bad POTUS, IMHO. Not perfect, but none of the possibilities is perfect. Of the sitting governors he would be my favorite.

It’s that “once elected” part that worries me. Name recognition deficit, a good solid guy but doesn’t generate any excitement. There’s no zip, no innovation, nothing to counteract the way he’ll be painted — as a stodgy, lifetime political animal (and, as you point out, lobbyist).

Can he raise money? Unknown — certainly not proven though.

Who knows, maybe the electorate has had enough of the “dazzle factor” with Bambi and is ready for a solid, reassuring, unexciting adult like Haley Barbour at the helm.

Or maybe not.

One thing is clear: whatever candidate is put up against Obama — however imperfect they may be — if they don’t win, it’s four more years of hell with Obama or maybe Hillary. I shudder at that thought.

FRegards

[FourPeas]

Better question is can you marginally like her and not be a deemed a hater, troll, DUer, or enemy of the Republic?

I'd say the answer is a resounding 'no'.

[pissant]

Cool. Freepmail me next time you are in Seattle.

[CynicalBear]

What I find absolutely hilarious is the fixation some people have on proving that Palin is not qualified to speak her own mind.