I really liked
Ann Coulter's take on this:
"I’m confused by all the confusion among the chattering classes about Palin. I thought her press conference explained it very clearly – though she couldn’t put it precisely this way without sounding vain, but it’s obvious.
Even though she’s just a state governor, she’s a HUGE national star who is both sought after and attacked as if she is already a president (a Bush, not an Obama). But she basically can’t participate because she’s tethered to the governor’s office up in Alaska. Consequently, she has to fight with one hand tied behind her back and she also can’t go around the country campaigning for candidates and principles she believes in – because she’s governor and would be accused of neglecting the state.
Meanwhile, the Lt. Gov. is a great guy, so she’s leaving the state in good hands and now she can go on to be an even bigger star.
It’s a weird Washington insider perspective to be perplexed by what she’s doing. Contrary to Mark Sanford’s e-mails to his mistress, no one was really impressed with him; 99.99999999999999999% of Americans didn’t know who he was. Who is more influential: Rush Limbaugh, Matt Drudge and Bill O’Reilly, or Tim Pawlenty, Bobby Jindal and Mark Sanford (before the fall)? As Palin said, God bless people who run for political office, but – and she didn’t say this part – she’s too big to be a lame-duck governor stuck dealing with fishing licenses in Anchorage right now.
She’ll be much bigger now and can play on the national stage without constantly setting off state ethics investigations by loons, parasites and liberals. None of this applied to McCain or Kerry – both of whom went back to the Senate – because their national campaigns diminished them. Palin’s national campaign made her a major star. As she said, she’s not retreating, she’s advancing in another direction."
Sorry, not even Ann gets it...from my earlier posts:
I really don't understand why no one seems to get it. She could not effectively run the state with so much controversy. She ended up spending most of the time she should have been governing fighting false accusations and it was costing the state for her to do so, so she is stepping down for the good of the state. She clearly stated that:
Political operatives descended on Alaska last August, digging for dirt. The ethics law I championed became their weapon of choice. Over the past nine months I've been accused of all sorts of frivolous ethics violations - such as holding a fish in a photograph, wearing a jacket with a logo on it, and answering reporters' questions. Every one - all 15 of the ethics complaints have been dismissed. We've won! But it hasn't been cheap - the State has wasted THOUSANDS of hours of YOUR time and shelled out some two million of YOUR dollars to respond to "opposition research" - that's money NOT going to fund teachers or troopers - or safer roads. And this political absurdity, the "politics of personal destruction" ... Todd and I are looking at more than half a million dollars in legal bills in order to set the record straight. And what about the people who offer up these silly accusations? It doesn't cost them a dime so they're not going to stop draining public resources - spending other peoples' money in their game.
It's pretty insane - my staff and I spend most of our day dealing with THIS instead of progressing our state now. I know I promised no more "politics as usual," but THIS isn't what anyone had in mind for ALASKA.
Why is that reasoning so hard to understand? In this selfish world, there still are a few rare people like Sarah who think about more than just their own political aspirations.