Posted on 11/15/2008 3:37:39 PM PST by mapmaker77
It strikes me as very curious that the perky Katie Couric couldn't come up with her own questions for Gov. Palin during her first interview with the newly minted VP nominee. Well, I guess she has a staff that does her thinking for her, but this one must have been out of their league. That is probably why they had to resort to has been dim functionaries like Sam Nunn. I'll bet Charlie Gibson did the same with his Bush Doctrine question. The bottom line is that Sarah Palin scares the hell out of the msm types, just like Ronald Reagan did.
You nailed that one. Sarah Palin is our version of Prime Minister Maggie Thatcher, Reagan's best friend. That's why the libs are so afraid of her.
That anybody would discount Sarah as a prime-time Presidential player in 2012 completely misses the point that she will have 4 more years of seasoning by 2012 and time to refine her knowledge of the issues and the policy positions she wants to espouse. Sarah will also only be 48 in 2012, still full of charm, vigor, and charisma. Sarah is not assured of being the GOP Presidential nominee in 2012 but neither is anyone else.
You're really weird. Don't ping me again.
I’ll be sending another email to Palin’s office in about a week. In it will be questions/responses that she may want to consider for the future. I’ll be annotating it with online references.
For example, given how ineptly she had been handled by her “handlers” on Team McCain, I have no idea if she is aware of Krauthammer’s article about the Bush Doctrine after her Gibson interview. If you remember, Krauthammer — who was certainly no great fan of Palin’s — chided Gibson for himself not knowing the meaning of the “Bush Doctrine,” a phrase invented by Krauthammer! The “Bush Doctrine” apparently has 4 or 5 different meanings, and is certainly not confined to the meaning of “pre-emptive self-defense”, which was the meaning Gibson had in mind.
Regarding SCOTUS decisions, she should consider the implications on private property of the court’s decision regarding eminent domain. She could consider the implications for the 2nd amendment on the decision about the D.C. gun ban.
Regarding education, she could consider whether market forces such as competition would improve the quality of education or not. If yes, then it is clearly in the interests of parents and children to favor vouchers, home schooling, and any other initiatives that breaks the stranglehold that government has on education.
Regarding the auto bailout, I would recommend to Sarah that she watch the DVD series of Milton Friedman’s “Free To Choose”, especially that famous bit about the impossbility of any one person manufacturing a pencil: the markets for the wood, the graphite, the rubber eraser, the yellow paint, etc., are all interconnected. Industries ultimately fail because they cannot efficiently create a product that people actually want to buy. Since the markets involved in car manufacturing are obviously just as interconnected as those involved in pencil manufacturing, artificially propping up the auto industry would prevent all the labor, money, machinery, executive know-how, technical know-how, etc. from migrating to some other industry that makes products people actually want. It would also prevent those resources from flowing into NEW industries that haven’t yet appeared but which need those resources to be available. It’s not a difficult argument to understand. Had the government felt that it was necessary to prop up the typewriter industry in the 1970, the millions of people now employed in various aspects of the computer industry (including data entry, graphics, animation, word processing, programming, etc.) would obviously not be employed in those industries. And the former typewriter industry employees are not unemployed; they are working in the computer industry (or simply doing something else). Machinery and new technology INCREASE total employment, not decrease it.
She needs to be kept aware of the latest research on “global warming.” Her instincts were correct that man has little or no effect on climate change. If asked about this issue, can she say with confidence, “In fact, recent research points to global cooling, along with the fact that CO2 is a miniscule part of the atmosphere and not effectively a ‘greenhouse gas’ — the largest component of such gases is water vapor.” I’m positive that no journalist has done enough homework to be able to counter that sort of response. She could certainly confer with Senator Inhofe’s office in Oklahoma. He’s been an outspoken opponent of global warming kookiness for quite a while.
See, I don’t think that Sarahcuda has a staff that watches the news to the extent that we do, or that can analyze it the way we can.
FReepers are in a position to help Palin over the next few years. We should take advantage of that situation.
What scares the libs and the Bob Michel wing of the Republican party is the draw Sarah Palin has on a broad swath of the American public. Most of those seeking power and holding on to it don’t want the average person to stand up for themselves. This is why, after the election, you still see the hard work to try and and crush Sarah Palin. They’re (media, moochers, and suck ups) trying to crush the American spirit.
Sarah is not assured of being the GOP Presidential nominee in 2012 but neither is anyone else.
It could be if Iowa and New Hampshire didn’t begin the primaries. Sarah must live in Iowa and New Hampshire from now until 2012 if she wants to be the nominee and then who knows if that will work. It really is aggrivating to have those two states begin the primaries. If Sarah could convince Romney to be her Vice President than go around the country on tour and address the economy with an expert like Romney then the Republicans could have a great chance to win in 2012...if not then it could be bad again.
Good grief
Ditto
What scares everyone about Sarah Palin is that they saw a VP candidate drawing tens of thousands of cheering supporters who were ordinary people. This is unheard of in the history of presidential elections. Historically, VP candidates attract very small crowds. Biden’s average was less than 1,000, usually a lot less. Sarah outdrew McCain, Biden, and rivaled obama’s rallies, except his staged mass rallies that relied on bussing people in from all over, and attracting people with free rock concerts.
At Williamsport PA Sarah drew close to 14,000 people to an outdoor venue with the temperature in the 30’s. Biden was in the same town and drew less than 500 to a high school gym which was well heated. The paper in Williamsport reported that the cheering was so loud that it shook the risers on which the media reps with their cameras was sitting.
In Jefferson City MO the day before the election, she drew 20,000 with just 24 hours notice that she was coming. In Springfield, MO at the parking lot of the Bass Pro Shop she drew 20,000, with thousands more giving up because of traffic.
You don’t draw crowds like that, and not scare the hell out of those in charge of the GOP, and those on the other side. It also is a cause for jelousy on the part of the other Republican governors.
Anyone underestimating this woman does so at their own risk. If obama’s popularity level is way down by 2012, Sarah could very well take the election. If, on the other hand, his popularity level is high, it would be wise for her to wait until 2016, she’ll only be 52, still young for a presidential candidate.
That won’t work. At 52, she just ain’t gonna be hawt no more.
that’s why she should run in 2012 when she is 48.
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.