Replies

I didn’t say Palin’s speaking fees disqualified her. I said that the fact that she didn’t finish her term reduced her opportunity to gain experience and that is why conservatives shouldn’t back her. My point is we need someone who enters the Oval Office know what he’s doing. Scott Walker is a good example of someone with experience managing an executive branch who will walk in to the oval office with a good understanding of how things work.

I’m not all that interested in Hillary Clinton, she’s not relevant here. We’re talking about the sort of candidate that conservatives in the GOP ought to support. Obviously Hillary isn’t an option.

God help us if Palin is another Teddy Roosevelt. Teddy was a progressive who expanded the power and scope of the Federal government. He helped elect Woodrow Wilson by running in the Progressive Party for President in 1912.

You didn't call out speaking fees, you said "seduced easily by money." For Palin, that includes speaking fees (and bendy straws) as well as TV shows. For Clinton, it's also speaking fees and books. Is that seduction (I presume you meant it as a character flaw) or earning a living? You can't condemn one without condemning the rest.

I mention Teddy as a parallel. I don't mean to infer that Palin ends up ushering in new era of progressivism; I simply point out a similar path to the White House.

-PJ