Posted on 01/17/2010 4:47:36 PM PST by St. Louis Conservative
Really, there's precious little fairness in the world. People tend to be slaves to emotion, and prejudices often reign supreme, even (in fact, especially) in those who rail against prejudice. This is why we'll see millions of Americans reflexively dismiss a politician simply because of the letter following his name. It is why people will often oppose a position they would otherwise support simply because it's being advocated by someone they dislike. Ah, that troublesome human nature.
This brings us to Sarah Palin, the Wasilla woman often billed as the best hope of the GOP. She certainly isn't one of those plain vanilla characters who inspire blasé reactions, that's for sure. It's just so often the case that people either love her or hate her, believe she is the cat's meow or the pig with lipstick, a political sensation or a puerile simpleton. I'm in neither camp.
Scrape away the emotionalism, and one realizes that Palin isn't at either extreme. Underestimated by the left and overestimated by the right, the truth about her lies somewhere in between. Where, exactly? That is secondary, because there is a more important point here relating to Palin's political future.
She doesn't have one.
I know this will raise the hackles of many, but you can forget Sarah Palin. I say this not because of her defects in ideology or lack of competency, but for a very simple reason: She has been Quayled.
Many of you know that I'm referring to what ensued after former Vice President Dan Quayle gave a public appearance at a school spelling bee in Trenton, New Jersey in 1992.
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
I didn’t project, I said what was MY problem, thank you very much.
You take other peoples comments out of context to elevate yourself.
Even when I was in kindergarten, I recognized that as cheating.
I also believe Sarah is the one to lead us out of this mess and I said as much in my comment.
But she still has to prove to many that she is who I believe she is.
That said...you are still an unrepentant cheater.
You had a chance to express humility and redeemed yourself. You chose to defend your error.
That's how folks lose respect.
I am a regular AT reader and I even thought about posting this article this morning just for the sake of provoking some thought. But I decided, “naw, why distract from Scott Brown’s great performance and all the good things that are happening within conservatism by posting such negativity?”
Evidently, AT took the opposite view and published it likely for the same reason that I nearly posted it - just to present divergent views and viewpoints and give readers something to think about.
Conservatism isn’t a monolith and I really don’t think it should be.
Oh, I agree, it's just, at least at this time, there are more of "them" than there are of us, and we will need all the help we can get.
***to present divergent views and viewpoints and give readers something to think about***
Correct: I’m thinking
Dan Quayle, George Bush I & II, Trent Lott, Newt, Bork, Tom DeLay, Clarence Thomas, John Bolton, Dick Cheney and many other GOP leaders were relentlessly abused in the MSM and had no stomach for hitting back with a vengeance or appearing less than gentlemen.
And it has to stop - if the MSM won’t stop it - then the American people have to demand respect for decency and decent people to represent them.
And just look at the dregs who get a pass from the MSM - Barney FRank, Chucky Schumer, Chris Dodd, Joe Biden, ..........etc., etc.,
Americans aren't going to elect someone in Congress for President again.
My bologna has a first name, it’s O-S-C-A-R....
Or that Roosevelt wasn't president when the market crashed in 29', and he didn't go on TV to tell the American people about it!
Well, the first link on his blogroll at his website is to the John Birch Society. LOL. I think you're on to something.
The Nov 19 Opinion/Dynamics poll asked if "you have a generally favorable or unfavorable opinion" of the following people.
Who was in first place? Oprah. 61. Nothing about whether they would vote for the person.
Your chart is useless. That whole opinion poll was useless.
It was also released before that book about the 2008 election came out revealing the behind the scene details of all the candidates.
Like the article said, most Americans will not vote for someone they believe is not very smart or doesn't have all the facts for the job. Sarah may be a quick study, but she had no historical background for today's international political scene.
That's fine for the Governor of Alaska, but not for V.P.
The (un)American (non)Thinker is at again!
What is wrong with these fools?
MSM does not have that kind of power now. Quayle did not go on to write a bestseller nor was he ever the sensation Palin was and still is. She has a political future as a candidate if she wants one.
“Sarah may be a quick study, but she had no historical background for today’s international political scene. “
-
Obama does?
Here’s last week’s Glenn Beck one-hour interview with Governor Palin.
I don’t believe you’ve watched it?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YgUNF20sj-E&feature=channel
I’ve picked a lane and it sure isn’t the left lane. So, has it been decided the only path to nirvana is via Palin’s car? If so, I suppose I should get off the thread, as it sounds like Gore with AGW—the discussion is over.
Rush is bypassing CPAC this time too!
CPAC is history, they’ve tipped their RINO hand too far to remain relevant
How about you pick the lane of building up the candidate you believe in, rather than nibbling away at those you don’t.
So who do you support, and why?
That is why some on the right are hating on her, that she is not going to this event. Instead she is going to the SRLC, thus, CPAC will not have as many people as they would have if Sarah attended. That is what this is all about. Rush went last year, but he is not going this year, that is VERY telling. How come Conservatives aren’t bashing Rush for not going to CPAC but they are bashing Sarah for not attending
I disagree with Duke on this one.
It’s almost ludicrous to speak of Dan Quayle in those terms, much less Sarah Palin, with the likes of Reid and Pelosi and the current administration running things these days.
People aren’t buying the “hype AND hyperbole”* anymore.
*Nancy Pelosi’s phrase.
Dan Quayle spelled potato with an “e”, as in potatoe.
So what? Either spelling is acceptable, just like the word “tomato” or tomatoe....either is OK. George Washington spelled “potato” with an “e” at the end.
At the spelling bee, it was a teacher who initially spelled “potato” with an “e” at the end.....Dan Quayle didn’t want to embarass the teacher, so he went along with it.
Meanwhile, Obama thinks there are 57 states, Biden thinks FDR was president in 1929 and went on not yet existing television to “comfort” the American people, and Al Gore takes a tour of Monticello while vide-president elect, points at busts of the founding fathers, and asks the tour guide, “Who are those guys?” Yet we hear no derision from the media because these goof balls are liberals.
As for Sarah Palin, she is the real deal.....a conservative who speaks her mind.....a person who won’t compromise her beliefs. No wonder the media craps their pants at the mere mention of her name.
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.