Replies

1) Her detractors in Alaska were bipartisan. She had disrupted both the machines, and the resistance to her was focused like a laser beam on a non-stop series of frivolous ethics complaints based on an ethics law she had help put in place. It was pure Alynski. She had two choices: Let the clock run out on a governorship that was doomed to paralysis due to the attack of a novel weapon, or unexpectedly take an immediate evasive maneuver, regroup, and come at the problem on an even grander scale, the national political stage. She chose the latter, perhaps wiser, approach. It’s what her dad said. She isn’t retreating; she’s just reloading.

As to whether it will be an issue, not to her base. Furthermore, to the extent she gets out there early, helping people not in her base understand through her book what she did and why, she is laying the groundwork to both advance her conservative message and to mitigate the damage done by the battle of Alaska.

Will it work? It’s a good strategy, and if the numbers work out, if she can get to enough people quickly enough, it may well carry the day (hence her new role on Fox, where a significant demographic is the independent). If it works, she will join the ranks of only a very few in American presidential politics who have demonstrated the kind of superior generalship that can systematically overcome a serious disadvantage. Let her enemies tread carefully.

2) As for Reagan, I was there, and I hold that Reagan was berated abut as badly as the media culture of that time would allow. I still remember his being derided for his role in the Bonzo movies, implying an intellect little better than a chimpanzee. It was a low-level, but cruel and continuous assault, but the left was not so deeply entrenched as it is now, and the attacks on Sarah reflect that increase in bravado and firepower. If we are to win, we will need someone, like Sarah, who just keeps on getting up and taking the next round of flak. She appears unstoppable at the moment, and that is what puts the left in such dread of her. One of their best weapons, ridicule, is ineffective against her. That, and the fact that she can honestly carry the flag for conservative values and genuinely unite the conservative front, makes her perhaps their worst nightmare come true.

3) I have one thing against her. I disagree with the states rights approach to rolling back abortion. I understand it as an incremental strategy. Fight the battle one state at a time. And I accept that in her thoughts and intents she is pro-life to the core. But I think she should go the way that Reagan was willing to go back in 1981, the signing of a personhood amendment if presented, a federal solution that recognizes the inalienable right to life is not a state issue, but a federal constitutional issue. But who knows. Three years is a long time. I hope someone gets to her before she assumes office and persuades her to rethink that approach. Time will tell.

If resigning was going w/the flow - it wouldn’t be a big deal! It would be what the libs, media and you expect.

So you see - Sarah goes AGAINST the flow and what the media and you expect. Their heads, and yours, are still spinning from it! Dead fish can’t handle ANYONE going against the tide.

She resigned, oh my, bad political move, how could she, politicians just don’t do that, this will hurt her and blah, blah - dead fish talking points. And ONCE AGAIN, Sarah proved them wrong!

You rock, Sarah, way cool!