Posted on 12/01/2010 7:48:56 PM PST by neverdem
Much of the punditocracy is obsessed with Sarah Palin. It's understandable on several levels. First, she makes for good copy and has a knack for coining catchy phrases ("death panels") and new words ("refudiate" -- it's now in the dictionary). She is controversial and opinionated, so given the choice between, say, a story on John Thune and one on Palin, it's a no-brainer to choose the best-selling author, TV reality show star and Tea Party darling. But conservatives suspect there's also some mischief-making afoot -- the desire by liberal-leaning members of the media and the White House to make Palin the symbol of the Republican Party, which they are convinced will translate into her presidential run, her nomination and a shellacking for the GOP at the polls in 2012.
You don't have to buy into a conspiracy to see that many in the media and on the left are convinced Palin will be the nominee. In fact, they seem to be in a bit of a time warp. Howard Kurtz recently praised her media savvy, an observation widely held by conservatives -- 18 months ago. Unlike conservatives who have had time to process the Palin phenomenon, non-conservatives are just beginning to evaluate her as more than a punchline or an object of ridicule. They suspect conservatives are oblivious to her shortcomings. But that's simply wrong.
For months now the real story on the right has been the search for new presidential contenders. There is far more awareness than many in the media imagine among conservative activists, Tea Partyers included, of Palin's limited appeal to independent voters. Her backing of questionable...
--snip--
And now there's Mike Pence...
(Excerpt) Read more at voices.washingtonpost.com ...
Crimney, reading those quotes, I wonder if she even knows what amnesty really means. At best, she was woefully unprepared for the aggressiveness of O’Reilly’s questions. At worst, she hasn’t given the issue any serious thought beyond punching her conservative ticket with the right soundbites.
I have a strong suspicion that it’s the latter. It’s doesn’t say much more of her if it was the former, though - O’Reilly does the same thing to every guest, so there isn’t much excuse for being unprepared.
Romney keeps defending the health care law in Massachusetts so it certainly is one of his main problems along with this liberal record as governor.
Romney is lying sack of manure. No conservative with a brain buys into the lies he spews.
If they did, I am a liar and an effing troll.
If they did not, well one of us is a liar and an effing troll either way.
The record shows just which one of us that is.
Credit Hog - Mitt Romney got more props than he deserved for health-care reform.
Romney's relatively stingy plan had little chance of becoming law. But it was an admission that, if the ballot initiative were to be headed off and the federal waiver preserved, something would have to be done. And on some level, Romney held surprisingly few cards, given the state's veto-proof House and Senate Democratic majorities.Mass. Gov. Romney Signs Health Insurance Bill; Vetoes Assessment on Employers Not Providing Coverage
Other VetoesWith faint praise from Ezra Klein of Journolista fame, the situation was worse than I remembered. There are many reasons to vote against Romney, that MA healthcare law, with multiple sections vetoed by Romney because of a line item veto in MA, is one of the weakest. You're entitled to have your own opinions. You can't have your own facts.
The governor vetoed several other provisions, but the "vetoes promise to be more symbolic than meaningful," as the Legislature "passed the bill overwhelmingly" and is expected to override Romney's vetoes, according to the Boston Globe (Helman/Kowalczyk, Boston Globe, 4/13).
Why is Romney bragging about it? How can he disown his past? Why are some pubbies saying that there are parts of Obamacare that they want to keep? Romney was given a lemon, so the opportunistic politician made lemonade.
And that would be another nail in Daniels' coffin.
Five hundred posts, or more, later and you finally submit a sensible one.
Not slighting Paul Ryan, but he looks like he’d fit right in as Nitti’s bookkeeper in The Untouchables.
Once again, Romney fails to acknowledge the failures of Romneycare and instead is promoting it as some kind of absurd positive. Romney is selling his particular brand of lemonade without sugar and expecting us to drink it up and enjoy it.
Well, for one thing, it equalized the tax treatment of individual policies and employer-sponsored policies.
But I don't want to get into Romneycare in too much detail, since I don't live in Massachussetts and I think Romney is going to run in 2012.
At the same time, I'm not sure conservative bickering over Romney is all that constructive, since I don't think he has a prayer of getting the nomination. His best chance was 2008, and it didn't happen.
I say we get behind another competent executive who has a good grasp of economic and fiscal policy issues. I have a mild prefernece for Daniels at this point, but he's by no means the only possibility. It's still very early.
That's a pretty good description of the amount of though she's put into any national policy issue (except, maybe, some topics related to energy). The woman's a lightweight, and there's no getting around it.
Perhaps, but there's one important difference: when they say it about Palin, it's true.
According to Britt Hume, Kristol was key to bringing Palin to the national spotlight prior to being selected as VP by McCain.
Maybe you should post over at Politico, I'm sure they believe that with the same fervor you do - and without anything to back it up (the libs think the lies about Reagan are true as well). And as I have said before, I'm not sure if Palin should run, as the media has Quayled her to the point that someone like you believes all of that bullcrap, but the kneejerk responses like yours make me far more sympathetic towards her actually running so we can make some popcorn and watch your handwringing.
He lost a goodly chunk of it in 2008 doing just that.
As a RomneyBOT, Curiosity, your attacks on Gov. Palin are
getting quite tiring.
IMHO his odds in 2012 are much worse. But we'll see.
She probably figured out she wasn’t going to win. No use alienating people you have to work with.
Okay, damn, that was fast.
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.