Posted on 11/19/2010 6:50:35 AM PST by WebFocus
By telling Barbara Walters that she thinks she can defeat President Obama, Sarah Palin has dimmed hopes cherished by sensible Republicans that she might decide against a run for the White House in 2012. Here are just some of the reasons she should not run.
The Republican nominee should be someone with a vast and impressive record in government and the private sector. Voters chose a novice with plenty of star power in 2008 and will be inclined to swing strongly in the other direction in 2012. Americans will be looking for sober competence, managerial skill, and maturity — not sizzle and flash.
After the 2008 campaign revealed her substantive weaknesses, Palin was advised by those who admired her natural gifts to bone up on policy and devote herself to governing Alaska successfully. Instead, she quit her job as governor after two and a half years, published a book (another is due next week), and seemed to chase money and empty celebrity. Now, rather than being able to highlight the accomplishments of Sarah Palin’s Alaska, we get Sarah Palin’s Alaska, another cheesy entrant in the reality-show genre. She’d so much rather be out dog sledding than in some “dull political office,” she tells the audience. File that.
It’s true. She is wildly popular with a swath of the Republican electorate. And, as a conservative woman politician told me, political consultants (who get paid the big bucks, win or lose) will doubtless descend upon her with game plans showing how she can win in Iowa and then cruise to the nomination. Maybe. But the general election would be a problem, since 53 percent of independent voters view Palin unfavorably along with 81 percent of Democrats, according to a recent Gallup poll.
There is no denying that Sarah Palin has been harshly, sometimes even brutally, treated by the press and the entertainment gaggle. But any prominent Republican must expect and be able to transcend that. Palin compares herself to Reagan. But Reagan didn’t mud-wrestle with the press. Palin seems consumed and obsessed by it, as her rapid Twitter finger attests, and thus she encourages the sniping. She should be presiding over meetings on oil and gas leases in the North Slope, or devising alternatives to Obamacare. Every public spat with Dave Letterman or Politico, or the “lamestream media,” or (God help us) Levi Johnston, diminishes her.
Speaking of television, have you watched “Dancing with the Stars”? Calling the show cheesy would be too generous. Perhaps the former governor should not be blamed for the decisions of her adult daughter. Yet there in the audience we see Sarah and Todd Palin, mugging for the camera and cheering on their unwed-mother daughter as she bumps and grinds to the tune of “Mamma Told Me Not To Come.” Her parents had advised her, the 20-year-old Bristol told an interviewer, that she had to stay “in character” if she expected to win. Being “in character” evidently meant descending to the vulgarity that DWTS peddles on a weekly basis. The mama grizzly was apparently unfazed by, or — equally disturbingly — unaware of, the indignity. And she is supposed to be a conservative culture warrior?
Voters prize judgment, above all, in a presidential candidate. Some of Sarah Palin’s 2010 endorsements were sound and arguably helpful. Others betrayed flightiness and recklessness. Tom Tancredo, Palin’s choice for governor of Colorado, has ridden his anti-immigration hobby-horse in a style perfectly suited to alienate Hispanic voters (describing Miami, for example, as a “Third World city”). Her endorsement of Christine O’Donnell was irresponsible and damaging, losing a seat that would otherwise have been a Republican pick-up. Of course, O’Donnell received an absurdly disproportionate amount of ink and attention during the race (the liberal press naturally seizes upon any opportunity to make conservatives look kooky), but Palin should have anticipated that. Besides, this one cannot be laid at the feet of the biased media. O’Donnell was a thoroughly unqualified candidate.
Palin has many strengths. I admire her fortitude and her principles. Her ability to connect with a crowd is something most politicians can only dream of. I will always remember her 2008 convention speech as a rollicking star turn. She would be terrific as a talk-show host — the new Oprah.
But a presidential candidate? Someone to convince critical independent voters that Republicans can govern successfully? Absolutely not.
— Mona Charen is a nationally syndicated columnist.
I meant the primary debates. My dog could beat Obama in a debate.
I did think that Palin held her own against Biden in the VP debate but that’s a really low threshold. Let’s see how she performs against the other Republican contenders in primary season.
Excuse me?
RomneyCARE was invented by, forced on the public by,
and solely the responsibility of,
Mitt Carpetbagger Backstabber Romney.
No. It was “invented” by the Heritage Foundation. It was changed by the Democrat legislature in ways that may account for the cost going up. But it originally came from Heritage. That’s just a fact.
And, the reason that Heritage was interested in the subject is because there was already a huge “redistribution of wealth” going on in a system where people were just showing up at hospitals without coverage or any means to pay for it, but they could not be turned away. That is going on everywhere. Those of us who pay our bills are also paying their bills.
YOU live in Utah. Here is Bastard fascist Mitt Romney
using the citizens of Massachusetts for his "experiment"
imposing DEATH PANELS and ROMNEYCARE.
And, yes, the SOB uses that word.
AFTER you impose RomneyCARE on your own state, RomneyBOT
your words may have some sincerity. Now there is NONE.
|
RomneyCare has not worked out because it it is big government fascist/socialism, implemented and signed into law by a big government fascist/Statist, namely Mitt Romney.
No thank you!!
You will not be promoting this Statist asshole on FR!!
You have a tendency to forget facts which don’t conform to your biases.
Heritage did originally draft Romneycare, and they were defending it as late as 2007. See http://heritage.org/Research/Reports/2007/04/The-Massachusetts-Health-Plan-An-Update-and-Lessons-for-Other-States
I think the biggest difference between Romneycare and Obamacare was that Romneycare was an effort to confront the problem of freeriders, while strengthening private providers of care and insurance. Obamacare is designed to force private providers and insurers out of business. But, I think the fine print will put the average voter to sleep, and that Romneycare will sink Romney’s chances, at least in the primary.
Here is part of an article by Heritage Foundation explaining Romneycare’s individual mandate. The rest of the article can be found at http://heritage.org/Research/Reports/2006/04/Understanding-Key-Parts-of-the-Massachusetts-Health-Plan
Understanding Key Parts of the Massachusetts Health Plan
. Published on April 20, 2006 by Robert Moffit, Ph.D. and Nina Owcharenko WebMemo #1045
Any comprehensive plan to reform health care will contain complex, and likely contentious, provisions. The recently enacted Massachusetts plan, based on a proposal by Governor Mitt Romney, is no exception. It contains complex provisions that have raised questions and concerns. But much of this controversy stems from confusion about the provisions. Therefore, understanding these provisions, especially in the context of the larger reform, is important.
Four Points of Confusion
The individual “mandate”: Under federal law, nearly all hospitals are required to provide a certain level of treatment to all patients who visit their emergency rooms, regardless of those patients’ ability to pay. Governor Romney sought a way to prevent the free-rider problem: those who take advantage of emergency services skip out on the charges, leaving taxpayers to cover the bill. Romney proposed that state residents either purchase health insurance or, if they chose not to do so, “self insure” by posting a $10,000 bond that could be put towards the cost of any hospital care they might use but be unable to afford. The Democrat-controlled legislature rejected the Governor’s proposal and forced on state residents a different choice: buy health insurance or pay a fine.
While many oppose a mandate to buy insurance-even basic catastrophic insurance to protect the community from individuals not paying their bills-on philosophical grounds, they should still have a firm factual understanding of the Massachusetts mandate, which may be less problematic than they realize. Thanks to regulatory changes that are a part of the Massachusetts plan, residents will be able to satisfy the mandate merely by purchasing catastrophic coverage through a high-deductible health plan or a Health Savings Account (HSA). With this regulatory change, the plan will promote HSA/high-deducible plans and make health care coverage more accessible and somewhat more affordable for individuals. The state will also provide lower-income individuals with a subsidy (essentially a voucher) to help them purchase health insurance, an approach similar to the refundable health tax credits that many support at the federal level. These changes make the mandate far less of a burden on individuals than it otherwise would have been.
. . . .
Some people on FR are accusing National Review of being RINOs. Do you believe Heritage are also RINOs? I know some of the people at Heritage. I have shared podiums with them, and invited them to speak at programs I have helped to organize. They are dedicated, conservative, intellectual heavy hitters who have devoted their lives to the cause of conservativism.
I am a very conservative voter who supports Sarah Palin. I just don’t think 2012 is her time.
p. s. You might want to work on your people skills, as your response to someone on your own team (me) was borderline churlish.
IMO many are very fearful that, during the initial campaigning and debates, she would majorly “expose” and “out” the RINOs in the race
Apparently the message did not get through ykour thick skull. Maybe this one will.
Zot.
But it originally came from Heritage. That’s just a fact.
______________________________________________
facts always have sources...
But not yours...
Remind me never to call you if I need an attorney in court...
the judge would call “contempt of court” and “perjury” on us both the first few minutes...
Long/short...
Wheres your source ???
Meanwhile nobody held Romneys lazy good for nothing sons hostage and made him sign for $50 abortions...
and those folks just showing up in the ERs were Romneys pet illegal aliens that he sponsered and protected...
Thank you from a loyal reader/poster.
That saved a lot of time for everyone.
:)
To suppose Sarah is not capable of doing the job is presumptive and likely tainted by some bias. Not ready for a woman President perhaps. There is a cabinet, Secretary of Defense, Secretary of State, Secretary of economic development, energy, education, ET AL. etc.
Many are the advisers, Presidents rely on their own hand picked people, trusted and doing the grunt work required to come up to present circumstances, know related history, facts, and suggest topic for discussion and ultimately the President decides.
All Presidents have such people. Kissinger, for instance is and was "an internationalist" with Clinton. Power struggles and influences are pushing on the President constantly. It is vital to have a person that can sort out the real issue and look at it squarely and cut the BS.
Sarah demonstrated she is up to the challenge.
I am confident Sarah with a good team will be good for America. She has sound roots, she is a great communicator, she is a Christian, has family values and wants to keep America strong. Democrats fear her abilities and condemn her every word and move and family, etc. Shame on them.
Romney is ‘the old as usual insider’ who has made deals for himself; and it is not good for America. Huckabee, is a good man; but is not strong enough to make hard decisions. Too namby pamby. Jindal might be a real good VP candidate. Possibly in a year or two Rubio, might show strength. Tancreado looked good a few years ago. What happened to him?
I live in Texas. Perry is not a guy for Washington. He was a Democrat and has many tendencies continuing in that direction. He has gotten big rich too, in his years since he succeeded the Governorship from President Bush.
To allow the democrat progressive liberals to demonize, marginalize, and believe the aspersions cast on Sarah is a HUGE disservice to America and our Conservative party.
“I know some of the people at Heritage. I have shared podiums with them, and invited them to speak at programs I have helped to organize. They are dedicated, conservative, intellectual heavy hitters who have devoted their lives to the cause of conservativism.”
Heritage has true conservative bonafides. However, no person or entity is beyond being wrong. There is also no protection against a Romney, stacking the seats and having them endorse socialist big government crap...which is exactly what RomneyCare is.
“Your attitude sounds like surrender, to me, and I don’t find that useful at all”
Surrender? Not even close. I actually hope I’m wrong, and I will vote for her. I’m just trying to look at reality here concerning the Independents who will, like always, decide the elections. Again, just looking at reality, so i hope I’m wrong.
Here you go, gator. Perry wants to invade Mexico! Well, send military assistance to battle the drug cartels. hmmm...
BZZZZZ. Wrong answer. That is the textbook MittBot drivel that is posted by the seminar posters from MittWorld. Mitt paid the Heritage Foundation to write something, anything, about his plan so that he could use it as cover to 'blame' for the atrocity that is Romneycare.
Besides, if it was Heritage's plan, please explain THIS:
Romney Gives Mass. Health Reform an 'A'
"The portrait depicts the governor seated at the front edge of his desk wearing his trademark business suit. Beside him is a small framed photo of his wife, Ann, and ... [wait for it] ... a copy of the health care reform law he called his greatest achievement.
Well done!
Good job, Jim!
Yep, when all else fails, try the "concern troll" approach.
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.
