Sarah Palin continues to galvanize the imagination of both her ardent supporters and her hectoring adversaries. It is easy to understand her appeal to those who have rallied behind her and her possible candidacy for the office of president of the United States. She has a lot going for her: charm, personableness, natural smarts, moral probity, executive competence, independence of character, and a passionate love of country. These are undeniable advantages, or should be in any sane political environment.

At the same time, she steps up to the plate with two strikes against her — or, in an alternative baseball universe, with three, four, or five strikes already logged in the umpire’s clicker. PDS (Palin Derangement Syndrome) flourishes on the liberal-left, to the extent that a correspondent to Salon.com suggests “we get rid of Palin” by having her electrocuted like one of Michael Vick’s dogs. According to the media scuttlebutt and her innumerable liberal detractors, she is poorly educated, brings no foreign policy experience to the job, shoots her own dinner, comes across as politically unnuanced, and, perhaps the most cutting strike against her, lacks gravitas. These negatives are obviously serious disadvantages for anyone contemplating a run for the presidency, but are they valid criticisms? Is she really “out” before she even takes a swing? Let’s consider each of these knocks against her in turn.

To begin with, Palin is by no means poorly educated; she merely did not graduate with a degree from an Ivy League institution, which by any reasonable account in today’s academic milieu should stand decidedly in her favor. Harvard, Princeton, Yale, Columbia, Berkeley and other so-called elite universities charge prohibitive tuition fees while, for the most part, delivering second-rate curricular fare. They represent the kiss of intellectual death — unless, of course, one wishes to enter the service of the State Department or practice trial or immigration law. Palin did well to avoid these bastions of mainly liberal-left political correctness.

As for the absence of foreign policy experience, David Jenkins reminds us in an article for PJM that, with the exception of the elder Bush (who, incidentally, was no presidential cynosure), “it is not common for presidents to enter office with foreign policy experience.” In this respect, Palin is no different from the vast majority of her predecessors and certainly not from the present incumbent. What is needed in this domain is precisely what Palin would bring to the highest office in the land: insight and principle. As Jenkins writes, “she knows that America must be strong in order to be safe, and…that we must develop our own resources and end our dependence on foreign oil.” Palin also knows that an American president does not bow and apologize to foreign despots and does not alienate loyal and tested allies, but comports himself or herself with dignity and courage.

Nor is there anything wrong with shooting one’s own dinner, especially when one considers that liberal urbanites are perfectly OK with having other people shoot their dinner for them. Unless they are dedicated vegans, their hypocrisy is indigestible, and even vegans would surely vote for a meat-eating Democrat. Being handy with a shotgun and knowing how to skin a caribou is plainly not the real issue here. The implication is that Palin is some sort of primitive rustic rather than a credentialed cosmopolite. But the truth is that frowning on Palin’s wilderness skills is nothing but class snobbery on the part of those who would be utterly lost were they stripped of the “civilized” amenities they thoughtlessly take for granted. It is their mincing pretentiousness and fashionable outrage, not Palin’s honest hardiness, that is deplorable.

Further, Palin is by no means politically unnuanced. Quite the contrary, she is as politically savvy as they come, whether on the domestic or international front. Her speeches during the recent congressional elections were not only unteleprompted barnburners in the best populist tradition, but revealed a meticulous command of the domestic issues currently bedeviling the nation as well as a finely nuanced understanding of America’s pancreatic failures in international diplomacy. She displays a far more realistic perspective on the Middle East and has far more accurately taken the measure of America’s geopolitical competitors, particularly Russia and China, than anyone in the Democratic administration.

Palin does not believe in tax and spend, in fiat printing, in redistributive economics, in ObamaCare, in the AGW nonsense that is only an opaque wealth transfer scheme, in making purses out of sows’ ears (aka pork and earmarks), in pressing reset buttons, in blaming Israel for the Palestinians, or in a degrading and unproductive “outreach” to the Islamic umma. These are policies she would reverse, as indeed would anyone with a nuanced understanding of the economic and political worlds. There is little doubt that Palin would be a strong, resolute, and effective president should she ever accede to the White House. Unlike Obama, she would not try to square the Oval.

Finally, if Palin lacks gravitas, then so do many others on the current political scene. Barack Obama, for example, not only lacks gravitas, he exhibits the moral and intellectual substance of a will o’ the wisp. This is not to take anything away from his golf game, but in political life he is always badly in need of a mulligan. Joe Biden is a figure straight out of vaudeville who can be dependably counted on to drop the cane he is trying to twirl — though, it must be admitted, he would look great in a straw boater. Hillary Clinton is, frankly, a wizened party hack and, like her husband, an adroit shape-shifter: one cannot trust a word she utters. No gravitas to be found amidst this crew.

Among the possible Republican contenders there are (or were) some potentially credible choices, at least from the standpoint of knowledge, experience, and/or presence. Newt Gingrich carries weight and political erudition but unfortunately also carries baggage. The same may be said for Jeb Bush, whose family name still remains a heavy burden he may not be able to shuck. His opposition to Arizona’s immigration law is also a very bad sign. Others like Marco Rubio and Allen West, both highly impressive figures, are too young or new to the field to be presidentially assessed. Chris Christie is a bold and ethical administrator, but is not a particularly persuasive communicator. John Thune is little known and Mitch Daniels is aura-challenged. Mike Huckabee’s banjo is not an electoral plus. Bobby Jindal and Tim Pawlenty are “good people,” but Jindal does not seem ready for higher office and Pawlenty is prone to misjudgment, such as withdrawing from the race for a third term as Minnesota governor that he could have won handily. Mississippi Governor Haley Barbour may have disqualified himself from consideration owing to certain insensitive or ambiguous racial comments — at least, journalist and fellow-Southerner Kyle-Anne Shiver appears to think so. John Bolton would make a decent president but an even better secretary of defense. Rick Perry’s secession remark, however flippant, has cost him dearly. Mitt Romney seems to wear a certain gravitas, but the “RomneyCare” fiasco that he imposed as governor of Massachusetts shows his weak and fallible side.

The real problem, however, is that “gravitas” is a vague and unreliable personality construct and, moreover, one that can be readily simulated by a good actor. Al Gore, for instance, managed to project seriousness of purpose for a time, until greed, corruption, and deceit tore away the mask with which he dazzled his public. “Gravitas” functions primarily as a media buzzword that can be applied indiscriminately, either to demean or to inflate its chosen subject. Only in the most proven and ineluctable cases can it be said to be an appropriate descriptor, and these are far and few between. Whether or not Palin is deficient in this regard, what she demonstrably lacks is the approval of a reprobate and partisan press, which is itself cripplingly short of integrity, not to mention gravitas.

But is Palin electable? The next two years will determine whether she will be able to counter the slanderous media campaign against her candidacy and her competence, and so convince enough people that she has the right stuff to lead the country in perhaps its most perilous historical moment since the Civil War. Clearly, she suffers more than her share of antagonists among the megabuck left and their myriad satellites, Ivy League academics, mainstream journalists, public intellectuals, union impresarios and henchmen, and the entitlement-addicted segment of the public. They are terrified of her. She even has the panjandrums in the Republican old guard shaking in their Guccis.

As Victor Volsky writes in American Thinker, “in the eyes of the political/cultural aristocracy, [Palin] is the embodiment of its worst nightmare: the revolt of the masses against their masters.” And she knows that the master class will mobilize its considerable reserves against her. The question is whether, by sheer force of character, will, and charisma, like an American version of Delacroix’s Marianne leading the charge at the electoral barricades, and by pursuing a tireless itinerary, she can prevail against overwhelming odds and bring to the American people authentic change and genuine hope for the future.

-- David Solway is a Canadian poet and essayist. He is the author of The Big Lie: On Terror, Antisemitism, and Identity, and is currently working on a sequel, Living in the Valley of Shmoon. His new book on Jewish and Israeli themes, Hear, O Israel!, has just been released by Mantua Books.

Sarah Palin's Charisma

By James Lewis

Why does the left hate Sarah Palin with such screaming rage? Why do they lose their cookies at the very idea of our Sally?

Think about that for a second.

Here's a beautiful, strong, intelligent, articulate, healthy-looking, truth-telling political winner in the State of Alaska -- a gun-totin', sports-lovin', all-American woman, elected on her own merits against a corrupt establishment in Anchorage, AK.

All the feminists should be dancing and cheering, right?

Wrong.

On top of all that, she married a native Alaskan who actually loves his country. And she had kids. With him.

Weird, I know.

Plus, she is not embittered, alienated, or divorced.

And her children smile a lot.

Best of all, Palin does not seem to think that free abortion is the answer to the population bomb.

Puhhh-leeeze! I can hear all the metrosexuals sigh.

Oh, Gawwwdd! Is this "Father Knows Best" or what?

Watch those eyes rolling up to heaven.

Watch those hands flopping like dead fish.

Today, the New York Times is a lot more scared of Sarah Palin than it ever was after three thousand New Yorkers were burned to death on 9/11/2001.

After all, Sarah Palin could do some real damage.

Have you ever seen a more out-of-its-mind mob than the liberal media yowling at the moon over Governor Palin? I can't remember any. Well, maybe the Danish cartoon riots in Peshawar, Pakistan. Or the old Kluxers in Mississippi before the real Civil Rights movement.

The left has all the subtlety of a high-tech lynch mob, as Clarence Thomas said in 1991, when they went all-out to destroy his good name before the Senate Judiciary Committee. Clarence Thomas knows about lynch mobs from the old South, and nobody has labeled the media better. Mad-dog, foaming-at-the-mouth, baying mediot mob. They prove it every day. Just watch 'em. They will do it again and again, until we stop buying their bull.

Sarah Palin freaks out the media -- especially the feminists -- like a combined Ronald Reagan and Clarence Thomas. She is their 9/11.

One of the promises of Palin for president is all the laughs we'll get for eight whole years if she gets elected and Obama goes down.

Just think of it: eight years of belly laughs. Guaranteed.

The Secret Service will have to triple its POTUS detail, because ranting lefties are dangerous. All the would-be assassins of the 20^th century came from the ranting left -- shooting JFK, Robert Kennedy, Reagan, and Ford. Not a single conservative. Not a single normal person.

Sarah, hang on to that shotgun. Alaska isn't the only place for big game. Save your best for D.C.

If 'Bam is "historic" for being black (which is bizarre enough), Palin will be doubly historic for being a passionately conservative female president. Skin color is only skin-deep.

With President Sarah Palin, we will get a sane and moral foreign policy, totally different from Obama's wacky prostration to the King of Saudi. Palin will work to reverse the damage done by Obama's Medical Piracy Act -- a big, big job. And best of all, Palin gives a wonderful example of what women (and men) can achieve. Sarah Palin is a normal person with a normal life who decided to fix what's rotten in Anchorage -- and now Washington, D.C.

What could be better than that?

Liberals get Palin's charisma vibes right off the bat. They can feel it running up their legs. Conservatives are more skeptical about politicians who inspire so much passion in millions of people. Well, skepticism is a good thing. It's what the liberals completely lost when they fell into abject, derrière-kissing love with The One. Now they are finally having second thoughts, when it's way too late. They have exposed who they really are with Obama, and even Soros is disappointed. Obama is the Buster Keaton president. If there's a banana skin he hasn't slipped on yet, he will locate it before his term runs out. Whoops! There he goes again!

While you're thinking about the next election, just enjoy the sight of Sarah Palin's charisma. Ronald Reagan had it. Obama lost it. No other Republican or Democrat in sight has it. Sorry, guys and gals, but it's true. Romney looks like a department store dummy. Palin is alive. You can see Romney thinking about every syllable he speaks. Palin's a natural.

This may be the crucial time for history to produce the woman, a critical time for a charismatic conservative to reverse the damage done by the Left. The single most important fact is that Sarah Palin can communicate. She can talk to the American people without talking down to them. She can have a real conversation, and it is high time to have a good talk with the American people. George W. Bush is a man of honor and character, but Bush knew his own limits. He could never explain himself the way Reagan did. Bush Sr. had exactly the same limitations.

But what we need more than ever today is a Republican leader who communicates with the people where they live. Constitutionalist conservatives must have a spokeswoman who touches the American people -- the millions who have been suckered and PC-whipped for far too long by the lefty media, now indistinguishable from the old CPUSA. We've been taken over by a Marx-light Democratic Party. In private they will tell you so. It's not a secret anymore, not after Obama.

Old Republicans like Karl Rove are running scared. I'm sorry to see it. Rove attacked Christine McDonnell in public the day before the last election, when he knew he could do the most damage. That makes him a back-stabber when it comes to the constitutionalist Republicans. Too many millions of conservatives are now noticing the selfishness of the old Republicans. If the old establishment stabs the constitutional Republicans in the back, we voters will take note and keep them out. Even Barbara Bush, the matriarch of the Bush clan, has destroyed our affection for her in a single public sneer. Ed Rollins has exposed his affinity for establishment Republicans. No longer. The voters are finally watching.

We are seeing a fight within the Republican Party, but this is nothing new. Ronald Reagan was defeated by establishment Republicans before he won the nomination. Today, the establishment would be running scared about Reagan, because he could not be bought and controlled. This is happening all over again. Reagan defeated Bush I for the presidency, and Barbara Bush may harbor an old grievance about that. Well, so be it. Constitutionalist conservatives are awake and keeping score.

Conservatives want a constitutionalist president like Reagan. The left has had its Marxist president for a time. They want party line rule over America; but America may have something to say about that before it surrenders to the new power class. Expect big fireworks from the left, and be prepared to give them as good as you get.

Sarah Palin is a once-in-a-lifetime phenomenon in politics. She is a charismatic constitutionalist. It's the combination that's so vital. Reagan had it. It scares the Democrats to death.

It is time for a constitutionalist who can talk straight with the American people. Human nature hasn't changed. The U.S. Constitution has not lost relevance. It is still the only functioning revolutionary political document in history. The Constitution limits the power class. Marxism empowers the powerful. It's not hard to understand. If Sarah Palin can get that single truth across to the American people, she will win and go on to become another Ronald Reagan.

Expect all the Esetablishment forces to fight against a constitutionalist conservative for president. It scares them more than a Marxist in the White House.

That's all you need to know about them.

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.