Palin Is No Reagan

American Spectator ^ | 7.6.09 @ 7:45AM | By Philip Klein

[Behind Liberal Lines]

[C]omparisons do a disservice to Reagan, who not only served two full terms as governor of California, but also spent decades studying the issues and immersing himself in conservative philosophy. His writings and radio commentaries make this abundantly clear. He proved people wrong because they objectively were wrong. This does not mean that whenever the media writes off or attacks a conservative politician that he or she is the next Reagan

****

to win and govern effectively you have to do more than "galvanize the party base" and "convince conservatives" -- you also have to convince independents and even some Democrats, as Reagan did [but] instead of going back to Alaska to gain more governing experience as many advised, Palin resigned after just two and a half years on the job. And there’s nothing to indicate that she has the slightest interest in boning up on policy. Honestly, what’s her incentive to study policy and do the boring task of governing? No matter what she does, her army of apologists will make excuses for her and lash out at those who dare to criticize her by accusing them of being liberal elitists who are threatened by her sheer awesomeness....

[N]one of this really matters if Palin intends to leave elective politics and become some sort of television or radio personality. My comments are only meant as a response to those who are still seriously suggesting her as a potential presidential candidate. Last October, an ABC/Washington Post poll found that only 35 percent of Americans thought Palin was qualified enough to be president, yet now her boosters expect us to believe that an additional nine months in office is all she needed to assauge Americans' concerns, allowing her to resign and prepare for a presidential run.

[chargers fan]

This would be true if Freepers were the only people who voted in elections.

[Pistolshot]

She doesn’t need to be Reagan. She needs to be Sarah.

[trisham]

All we have to go on, is the reality check: what heterosexual American guy could get angry about Sarah Palin?

*********************

LOL! It's a compelling argument, I must say.

[sticker]

Palin is like Forrest at Fort Donelson: She is being attacked by an enemy that will not relent, while dealing with people that wish to surrender the common folks while escaping themselves

[GOPJ]

Palin doesn't need to be Reagan to be a worthwhile candidate.

You are right. She'll do just fine being Palin...

[Cringing Negativism Network]

Tell you what.

How about you climb up Buffalo street and back down for a week. Then have a veggie burger. With tofu.

Then if Palin hasn’t done or said anything which is to your satisfaction, then you go ahead and pile on!

Until then, that is exactly what you are doing. And yes you’ve been in Ithaca too long. IMHO. :)

[perfect_rovian_storm]

I’ve done nothing to ‘prove your point’.

YOU are the one who started calling people who might disagree with your position an ‘army of apologists’ and then have the audacity to tell me that _I_ am the one who called you an ‘out of touch liberal’?

Your behavior here indicates one of two things: either you’re trolling for a fight about this, or you’re a complete drooling moron. I vote the former, since I’ve read your posts on FR for years. Though, the latter is not completely out of the question.

I haven’t really taken a position about Palin either way. I’m waiting to see what happens. However, people like you seem so adamant about pushing her aside. It’s almost zealotry. One looks at that and wonders what you have to gain from it.

[Dan Middleton]

"All we have to go on, is the reality check: what heterosexual American guy could get angry about Sarah Palin?"

One who appreciates a nice pair of gams as much as anybody but looks for a little more in a president?

We were the people gnashing our teeth in rage about the Obama shirtless pics, right?

[MadIsh32]

Agree.

I have stated that I will defend her from frivolous liberal attacks and won’t bash her like I was doing Saturday.

However the hero worship of Ms. Palin on this site is just as bad as anything I have seen from liberals and the President

[mo]

So what? The East Coast Liberal Intelligentsia have ruled from Washington since Jack Kennedy invited them into the White House..

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1586485636?ie=UTF8&tag=cuupwiagobo0e-20&link_code=as3&camp=211189&creative=373489&creativeASIN=1586485636

They are about to be deposed....and they know it...

[IMissPresidentReagan]

Sarah Palin is the “winnowing fork”, separating the wheat from the chaff. People can’t help but have to choose a side. We know whose side she’s on, and we know whose side those who oppose her are on.

As for the Reagan comparisons - she’s not “the next Reagan” anymore than she’s the “next Margaret Thatcher”.

She’s the first “Sarah Palin”.

Let me be the first to second that notion. :)

[GQuagmire]

caps lock use works for once.

Sincerely,
The Underhill’s

[A message]

Nailed it.

[KevinDavis]

When Hunter gets more .5% in a vote then I will support him.

[SoFloFreeper]

Klein, IMO, is absolutely correct.

Palin, as attractive as she is, really needs to spend more time immersed in the issues...speaking on them....thinking about them....writing about them....I think the notion that she must run in 2012 is misguided.

I hope that is her plan.

She has awesome potential.

[gwilhelm56]

LOL ... we only have 3 FReepers in the “CITY OF EVIL” (that I know of) would hate to see one go to “The Dark Side”!!

Like her or not, Palin, IMHO.. is what gave McCain his creditable Loss. WITHOUT PALIN, McCain’s vote count would have Rivalled MONDALE in 1984.

But then, I couldn’t blame her if she told everyone to go EFF themselves and go off and go Fishing!!

[rightwingintelligentsia]

Palin doesn't need to be Reagan to be a worthwhile candidate.

And therein lies the problem with this analysis. It assumes that the only way she can win is to "be like Reagan", and follow his path exactly.

Obama is most certainly no Reagan. He never finished his first term in the U.S. Senate, and campaigned for president from day one of taking office there.

But Obama is now in the White House. The rules have changed, apparently. I don't think necessarily for the better, but they are what they are.

[NativeNewYorker]

I loooooooooove Sarah. Her imperfections pale next to her attributes. And, who else do we have in non-RINO-land?

[SoConPubbie]

Unfortunately, there doesn't seem to be a real "next Reagan" on the scene, and we may have to accept that there never will be another Ronnie. But that doesn't make people trying to convince us that it's Palin right. At this point, she doesn't deserve to be mentioned in the same breath. Sometime in the future? Anything is possible. But right now, she's done nothing to be worthy of such fanatical, fawning loyalty.

You wish!

Apparently, you have had your head in the sand, because there are a whole lot of people who disagree with you!