Alas, he *didn't* get any better!
Cheers!
Posted on 01/22/2011 8:13:05 AM PST by Kaslin
After Tucson, Ariz., shootings, Sarah Palin's unfavorable rating in the CNN poll rose from 49 percent before the midterm elections to 56 percent now. It was not the left-wing charges that Sarah Palin had somehow incited the Tucson shooter by her aggressive political rhetoric that did her damage. Polls show that voters discounted these statements and even Rep. Giffords' husband has made clear that there was no political motive involved. It was Palin's response to these attacks that got her in trouble. Her highly publicized accusation that the criticism was a "blood libel" turned voters off. As sincere admirers of hers, we hope she learns a lesson from this exchange.
The lesson is simply this: She should not become a battering ram hammering at liberal critics -- getting down into the mud with them -- answering every attack, no matter how low, personal or undeserved it is. She is a potential presidential candidate for the Republican Party. As such, she needs to keep her own head unbloodied and intact. Battering rams don't find that easy to do.
The left plays Sarah like a fiddle. They pile on with totally outrageous attacks aiming at her personal life, her children and her family, and -- now -- linking her to murder. These disgraceful attacks do not score points with the voters. In fact, they tend to trigger a sympathetic feeling toward Sarah when they are leveled. But, for some reason, Palin feels compelled to answer them, to reply, to tell her side of the story (aka the truth).
The result of the exchange is that both sides lose: Her attackers and Palin herself both suffer. But the attackers aren't running for anything. They just go on to the next attack. They are after ratings and circulation, not votes -- and the more sensational their accusations and the more vulnerable the target, the better. But Palin has an image to protect, and when she is hurt in these exchanges, it matters politically.
Palin's basic point was, as usual, sound. These killings were the act of an evil madman, not anything related to our political dialogue. But this sensible point got buried, and many voters looked at the "blood libel" statement as self-indulgent and thin-skinned. To them, Palin seemed to be the one using the murders to besmirch her enemies, even though she was only answering their charges. Critics charged that she looked more concerned about defending own personal reputation from the attacks than with the national tragedy that had just taken place.
The point is that Palin should not and cannot answer. She needs to rise above the attacks. If she is going to run for president, she needs to be presidential. She can't descend to the level of her critics. She needs to do what makes her look good, fighting for less government and conservative causes, not what makes her look bad -- fighting with her enemies.
If Palin took the high road -- as Obama did -- and decried the violence in our society and stuck to condemning the killings, she would not have been hurt by the liberal charges. But, by answering, she exposed herself and got hurt.
Next time, we hope she learns her lesson.
Dick was a Dem, is always an opportunist...chases the dollar. He is a Rino and a hired gun; whoever pays him the most, he’ll be that party. He is the male version of Peggy Noonan.
Rino.
>> Article: If Palin took the high road — as Obama did —
Establishment bullcrap.
Sarah Palin is nothing but prey to these beltway witches.
>> Article: But, by answering, she exposed herself and got hurt.
The establishment has in unison praised Obama and derided Palin on the heels of what is perhaps the most egregious form of aggression by the Leftwing media against an innocent person, Sarah Palin.
Go pound sand, Morris.
Alas, he *didn't* get any better!
Cheers!
Bull! Sarah shouldn’t have answered? .... It would have been much worse if she said nothing, ....
Which was certainly George W. Bush's experience -- and his daddy's, IIRC, whom the press managed to cut down to loserdom in the space of a single year so their boy Slick the Sinkmeister could win.
Someone has to fight back, but only Sarah in this case, or the White House, in Bush's case, owns a megaphone big enough to overcome the Leftist Media Claque.
It's a conundrum, and a problem deliberately created (with malice aforethought, it goes without saying) by the Gramscian "long-march" traitors in our media.
Too, if CNN (I'll bet they did) only referred to a short clip of the video, and were interviewing people who'd only seen the Enemedia-edited clips, then their poll automatically becomes a "push" poll. Which fits what they were really doing -- BDA (battle-damage assessment) intel gathering for the Enemedia and RatRoots.
I'd be very surprised if Dick Morris ends up on her campaign. Sarah Palin has had her fill of the smary "inside-the-beltway bastards. If she gets into Washington, it'll be with outsiders.
No, they're on the other side. They're antagonistic to Palin, because they want Their Boy Mittens in the White House. They'd rather put up with four more years of Obama, and a Democratic successor to boot, than have Palin lead the Unwashed into the inner sanctum of the Republican Party, which is theirs!
RatRoots.
I like that.
What do you do if you have an insidious, endemic, Rat problem?
You deploy your snakes and cats.
Yeah, Rahm calls them the "Netroots", when in fact the example of their activity we have most conspicuously before us is actually low-level provocateurs who called themselves the "ankle biters" up in Alaska. So I call them "RatRoots" -- cybernetic hitmen for Rahm and the 'Rats.
By the way, I see on PBS that there's an oversupply of Burmese and reticulated pythons in Florida ...... would those do?
wtf (after breakfast)
Thanks grey_whiskers.
HA!! Love it!
Dick Morris and Eileen McGann wrote this, so...
Thanks grey_whiskers for the ping.
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.