Mitt Romney’s main strategy in the GOP primaries of 2012 is to hammer Sarah Palin as “a quitter”.

Hillbuzz ^ | May 28 2010 | Kevin

[curth]

Yesterday, I was interviewed by a reporter for CBS, for a story on the diverse groups of people supporting Sarah Palin online. The reporter authored a book on Palin last year, after being embedded with her vice presidential campaign, following a stint covering Mittens Romney. I can’t imagine how many cucumbers-and-mayonnaise sandwiches this guy had to eat on the Romney Express (to nowhere), but I gave him the same kind of awed respect I grant anyone who’s ever spent more than half an hour with Tim Pawlenty — and didn’t succumb to T-Paw induced narcolepsy.

We (the reporter and I, not Tim Pawlenty or Mittens) met up at Nookie’s Tree in Boystown and talked about Sarah Palin over coffee. Doing enough of these interviews over the course of the last few years, and being interviewed by some great people like Andrea Shea King and Tammy Bruce, I can usually spot the story the reporter wants to tell by the way his questions unfold and what he keeps coming back to whenever I take the conversation on one of my tangents about how terrible the current administration is. The story CBS wants to do on Palin’s supporters appears to be something in the realm of “an unthinking, personal, and emotional defense of a woman they love”. It’s not a negative story, and the reporter doesn’t seem like the kind who would write a hit piece, on either Palin herself or on me as a Palin-supporter, but the impression I got from him was that he’s projecting the Left’s Obama cult of personality onto Palin supporters — when nothing could be further from the truth.

Most of the questions asked of me were in the vein of how I felt whenever Palin was attacked, and what makes me defend her.

[MaggieCarta]

Mitt Romney’s main strategy in the GOP primaries of 2012 is to hammer Sarah Palin as “a quitter”.

Good. I was afraid Romney would go all "policy wonk" and begin articulating why Republicans would be better for this country than Zero. Or, worse, force the media to closely scrutinize precisely what role Todd Palin played in the all too brief AK governor gig. Or...well...you get the idea.

Several things are wrong with this story. First, excuse my abject ignorance, but who is "Kevin"? Apparently, some blogger who was interviewed by CBS. He wrote: The story CBS wants to do on Palin’s supporters appears to be something in the realm of “an unthinking, personal, and emotional defense of a woman they love”.

A cursory look at the article/blog referenced reveals that "Kevin" is gleaning his insights from the reporter, ("a very nice guy, and handsome in that nonthreatening Sears catalog model sort of way") not from any real investigation or inside knowledge. But, hey, why let that stop everyone?

[onyx]

And Another thing we should ask Mitt hows Utah doing. I would guess after the Bennett thing not to well.

Bwahahaha. That's right. He cried, whined and begged on Bennett's behalf.

[Lakeshark]

Are you a Mitten too?

[MaggieCarta]

Can I call you a Palinista?

[Lakeshark]

Your problem not mine.

Since you're so sensitive (and Mittens was never pejorative) I'll re-phrase, do you like Mitt? Do you want him to be the GOP candidate?

[MaggieCarta]

Quitting killed her POTUS dreams if she ever had any. It gave her opposition in any quarter the chance to ask her...

"Mrs. Palin, we know what it took to get you to quit the governorship. Since the problems, attacks and affronts are so much greater in the presidency, what will it take (to make) you to quit that job?"

wtc911 has a point, there, Palin people. She had better have a ready answer. Frankly, her abrupt departure (quitting, if you will) really doesn't play well in some circles.

[MaggieCarta]

Sorry, ‘shark, I thought “Mitten” was a slam.

[Lakeshark]

No prob.

And trust me, I've been called lots of worse things than "Palinsta"

:-)

[Lakeshark]

Try my post # 137 and extrapolate.

[GGpaX4DumpedTea]

Romney is a POS. He should crawl back into the hole he crawled from which he crawled.

[FreeReign]

If she had national ambitions then quitting was a damned stupid move.

Staying in Alaska until Jan. 2011 would have killed her national ambitions.

I think most people can see that.

[wtc911]

Anyone who thinks that the media, the opposition and the late-night clowns won’t hammer her with that question is naive. She handed them a gift. Just think of all the Tina Fey skits.

[MaggieCarta]

...She hasn't "quit" at all, she's just reset her sights and they are on reclaiming our country....

Good spin, Lakeshark! (I mean, good take on the "q" bomb quandary.)

However, please don't be disappointed if Mrs Palin does not take your free, yet very valuable, advice. She hasn't taken any of mine to date.

Gotta run, FRegards!

[Lakeshark]

Spin?

Not at all, it's what she promised and what she's doing.

But I wouldn't expect a Paul supporter to understand someone actually doing what they say they're gonna do.....

[MaggieCarta]

...Just think of all the Tina Fey skits.

Ugh! I'd rather not...

Really leaving, now. Have a good holiday!

[SUSSA]

Watt and Donovan were the best of the lot, good conservatives, but both got pushed out. Bennett fought eliminating the Dept. of Education and backed expanding it.

James Baker was a Ford/Bush liberal who never should have had a job in a conservative administration. Howard Baker was even worse. He was a RINO Senator before running for president in 1980. He ran to the left of Bush and dropped out throwing his support to Bush rather than Reagan.

[rbmillerjr]

“Neither one of them(Palin nor Romney) will be the nominee.”

I don’t think you fully understand the advantages they have and the huge wall the others have to climb.

It reminds me of the movie, “dumb and dumber”...

“What are my chances”?

“one in a million”

“Yes. You’re tell’n me there’s a chance”

...
It will be Romney or Palin...bank on it.

[Dr. Sivana]

I make the assessment that quitting was the best financial decision for herself based on her own comments about the personal cost and on her actions since quitting.

Bear in mind that in her resignation speach she gave multiple reasons and none of them clearly.

I read the book, and had no problem with her reasoning. I don't recall the details of the speech, but the gist was similar. Beats the heck out of the "spend more time with my family" nonsense. This was not a one-dimensional decision. Certainly, not being hammered with frivolous lawsuits is a financial plus for her. I stated she made the best decision under the circumstances. The people of the U.S. are served better, the people of Alaska, and yes, even the Palins themselves are served better. I'll take that process over that of "non-quitter" Larry Craig.

Most spend every minute up to their last day in office trying to push their agenda.

Romney sure didn't, unless his agenda is not a conservative one. (I am thinking of his weak response to the court decision regarding homosexuals that happened on his watch.) Except maybe for RomneyCare. Pataki, Cuomo, Rell, Jim Thompson are governors of both parties who come to mind who just played out the string. They do mostly like to spend money at the very end,(e.g. Christie's predecessor).

I know what quitters look like. Female political quitters look like Patsy Schroeder. Sarah Palin is no Patsy Schroeder.

And if it turns out that Palin is running for president, then she is acting no differently than many who left office to pursue a higher one, knowing full well that that a formal announcement puts on a lot of restrictions, which is why so many don't formally announce even when there move is well-telegraphed.

[Dr. Sivana]

James Baker was a Ford/Bush liberal who never should have had a job in a conservative administration. Howard Baker was even worse. He was a RINO Senator before running for president in 1980. He ran to the left of Bush and dropped out throwing his support to Bush rather than Reagan.

Okay, James Baker was a biggie. Howard Baker was only brought in at the very end, during the Iran-Contra kerfuffle. I fear that Reagan's mind was already starting to slip then.

[wtc911]

I read the book, and had no problem with her reasoning. I don't recall the details of the speech, but the gist was similar.

_________________________________________

The book was written months after the fact and, as with any down-the-road explanation, was self-serving.

I watched her resignation live. I recall it clearly. It was disjointed and unconvincing.

When she finally said she was resigning it seemed like a spur of the moment call, like she was involved in an internal dialog and decided to jump. My immediate thought was that she just blew any chance at the WH.

When she rambled on and came up with the "lame duck" rationale I laughed out loud. Since then it has been impossible for me to take her seriously as a potential POTUS.