Morning Shows Tout White House Claim that 'Distraction' Sarah Palin Is 'Re-Election Insurance'
Covering the growing buzz that Sarah Palin might mount a 2012 presidential campaign, the morning shows on Friday repeated liberal talking points proclaiming that it would be a disaster. Good Morning America's George Stephanopoulos insisted that the White House looks "at Newt Gingrich, Sarah Palin and Michele Bachmann as, basically, re-election insurance." CBS's Chris Wragge hinted that Palin might become a "distraction."
On NBC's Today, David Gregory appeared and lectured that "[Palin's] not seen as a general election candidate." He added that "she's still relevant. She's still using Facebook. She's still opining. She's still attacking the President, but she's lost a little bit of that sting in her punch."
Co-host Meredith Vieira gloomily wondered, "But David, she also has higher negatives than any other GOP candidate. So how viable would her candidacy even be?"
Appearing as a guest on GMA, political analyst Matt Dowd was a little more optimistic about Palin's chances against Obama. He suggested the White House may be "celebrating" the idea of the former Alaska governor running, but allowed "...Though I think Sarah Palin would help him get reelected, it's no slam-dunk if the economy isn't doing well, come a year from now."
Over on CBS's Early Show, correspondent Jan Crawford was more positive, pointing out that Palin raises the "energy," she explained, "But I've got to say, a lot of Republicans think that the bus tour is win-win for the party. Palin can get out there and talk about the issues, really take on President Obama, and get conservatives fired up about this election."
However, co-host Wragge sounded a similar, defeatist theme: "Well, we know she galvanizes Republicans, but she also does not have a high favorability rating in the national electorate. If she can't beat the incumbent, President Obama, right now, does she become more of a distraction for the Republican Party?"
For more on this, see a post by the MRC's Brent Baker on how the evening newscasts covered Palin.
A transcript of the David Gregory segment, which aired at 7:07am EDT, follows:
MEREDITH VIEIRA: David Gregory is moderator of Meet the Press. David, good morning to you.
DAVID GREGORY: Hey, Meredith.
VIEIRA: So here's what a lot of political insiders are saying about Sarah Palin, they're saying it may look like she's going to run but she has not laid the necessary groundwork to actually do so. What are you hearing?
[ON-SCREEN HEADLINE: Decision 2012; How Would Palin Candidacy Change GOP Race?]
GREGORY: Well, pretty much the same thing. That she is making herself relevant, keeping herself relevant, that she's really not taking the steps to run. And as Andrea reported, these are some high profile signs that she's putting herself in a position to announce, but look, Sarah Palin runs kind of a closed society in American politics. There are very few people outside of her inner sanctum who really know what she's going to do. And she could just be looking at a couple of key factors that Andrea mentioned. She's second in the polls right now, according to a Gallup poll, behind Mitt Romney. High name recognition. Two, with Mike Huckabee gone there is still that space for a social conservative, more of a populist candidate. She could fill that void, particularly in Iowa, which kicks off the voting.
VIEIRA: But David, she also has higher negatives than any other GOP candidate. So how viable would her candidacy even be?
GREGORY: Well that's why there's so much skepticism that she would actually run. She's not seen as a general election candidate. And even among rank and file Republicans, according to Republicans I speak to, she's lost a lot of favor, if you go back to the response to the Tucson shootings and other issues. So she's still relevant, she's still using Facebook, she's still opining, she's still attacking the President, but she's lost a little bit of that sting in her punch. Still very popular in the grassroots but as a broader appeal, simply not taking steps to make herself more popular.
VIEIRA: But could she become a real spoiler? And now I'm thinking of Michelle Bachmann, who is going to announce next month, she's says, whether or not she's going to run. The other Tea Party favorite. Could she – could Palin knock the wind out of Bachmann's sails, so to speak?
GREGORY: Well and there's some feeling that perhaps Palin doesn't want Bachmann to steal that spotlight. I think that's true because they'd both be vying for the same space. That populist candidate the social conservative candidate. Bachmann, who was born in Waterloo, Iowa, is going to have a major announcement there perhaps to announce a presidential bid next month. So she might very well play well among the 40% of caucus-goers who are more socially conservative.
Palin there as well. But know this, Palin is a factor whether she's a candidate or not a candidate because she has her own strong platform. So either way, she makes some noise in this presidential race. She has more potential impact, of course, if she's a candidate.
- Scott Whitlock's blog
- Login to post comments
Comments
Sarah and Pravadmites
Submitted by PSPCpl on Fri, 05/27/2011 - 1:19pm.
Sarah is to the Demos as a stake is to vampires. They fear her, revile her, and avoid her as much as possible.
She is intelligent, conservative (but I repeat myelf), good looking, and fearless in pursuit of truth, justice, and the REAL American Way. She refuses to be intimidated by the DNC or the MSM (but again, I repeat myself). She is articulate (needing no promptor) and adheres to KISS without being condescending. They know that she has the potential to galvanize the TEA Movement people, the grassroot Republicans, the Blue Dog democrats, and the libertarians.
Whenever the MSM tells us that a Republican candidate or maybe candidate is unelectable, you know the opposite is true. When ever the MSM attacks someone who isn't even in the race yet (and has since 2008), that person is giving them a tinkle down the leg.
I agree with much of what you wrote . . .
Submitted by Galvanic on Fri, 05/27/2011 - 1:57pm.
. . . but as much as I think the Left fears her as a female icon -- mother with political career, athletic, attractive, upbeat, undefatigible -- I think they are ready to take her on as a candidate, because the MSM has done a hatchet job on her image.
Her fatal flaw is having resigned her office as Governor of Alaska. I don't care how much folks on this site alibi her decision, she will be painted as quitter, and that will stick in the minds of many independents.
I admire her, but even if she gets the nomination, she can't win. She'd even be a liability as a VP candidate now.
And this relates back to comments I made in 2010 about the dilemma for the GOP. They rely on the primary/caucus process, and that's something that Palin's people are good at.
No Vulcans Here
Submitted by Utherpend on Fri, 05/27/2011 - 2:26pm.
You logic is flawed, she is polling higher than most and neck and neck with the others and she has yet to declare or even campaign. So to say she is a detriment is BS. Newt, Mitt, they couldn't win last election what makes you think people are going to look at them any different now?? get a clue and get on board, NONE of those who have declared have the ability nor the vision to win.
She polls well among Repubicans . . .
Submitted by Galvanic on Fri, 05/27/2011 - 3:33pm.
. . . while her popularity with the general population has sunk dramatically in the past year.
A lot can happen over the next 1.5 years, but I suspect Obama has no worries running against Palin. And if he dumps Biden for a female VP running mate, his prospects improve.
I think what they do fear is a dark horse entering, like Marco Rubio, a conservative who could rip the Dems "Latino base' apart.
Nonsense. Obamas budget got
Submitted by Free Stinker on Fri, 05/27/2011 - 3:43pm.
Nonsense. Obamas budget got voted down 97-0 in the Senate yesterday. Ninetyseven to Zero. Do you Understand what that means? He is in deep trouble.
/// Sarah Palin Fan since July 11, 2007 /// خال
It did????? No mention in the MsM
Submitted by Blonde on Fri, 05/27/2011 - 3:44pm.
....crickets chirp.
And yes, I knew that. But all the poor (non-political junkie) schlub who watches regular news will hear is "Paul Ryan's MEAN MEDICARE BUDGET FAILS!".
I loathe the media.
Handy Reference Guide to Obama's Gaffes and Goofs ~ Currently Numbering 200 (and Counting)
You tell me
Submitted by Galvanic on Sat, 05/28/2011 - 1:13pm.
Free Stinker: "Obamas budget got voted down 97-0 in the Senate yesterday. Ninetyseven to Zero. Do you Understand what that means? He is in deep trouble."
It was a procedural Senate vote. So, what does it mean? Nothing.
Do the voters know what was in his budget proposal? Do they even care? No.
Dems aren't abandoning Obama; they are rallying around him because he is still more popular than they are.
Their strategy is to convince voters that Obama and the Dems are necessary to prevent the GOP from taking over the government and dismantling Social Security and Medicare. That campaign has already begun, as demonstrated in NY-26's special election, and it worked.
They are also trying to avoid discussing alternatives to Ryan's plan because (a) Obamacare is already in place and kicking into high gear in his second term, and (b) that is there alternative to Ryan's plan, regardless of how unpopular it is.
Galvanic
Submitted by Free Stinker on Sat, 05/28/2011 - 6:08pm.
It was a procedural Senate vote. So, what does it mean? Nothing.
If the vote was so meaningless, they wouldn't have all voted against it.
/// Sarah Palin Fan since July 11, 2007 /// خال
His logic isn't flawed, it's quite accurate
Submitted by ckc1227 on Fri, 05/27/2011 - 5:10pm.
"Newt, Mitt, they couldn't win last election what makes you think people are going to look at them any different now?"
They probably won't. But that has nothing to do with whether Palin is electable. All that means is Palin isn't electable, and Newt and Mitt aren't either. Just because voters don't like Mitt or Newt doesn't mean they like Palin.
"NONE of those who have declared have the ability nor the vision to win."
Unfortunately, you're probably right. Still doesn't make Palin electable. It just makes her one of many who can't win. Of all of them, however, she is the one with the least chance of winning...well, except maybe for Ron Paul.
And I don't know what polls you're watching, be she's not doing that well. Here's one released today showing her trailing Rudy Giuliani, and he has barely even been mentioned as a potential candidate.
I don't know who our candidate should be, and it's really frustrating that no one stands out. Obama may be vulnerable, but if we nominate the wrong person, he's going to win. Unless something major happens to sway public opinion, Palin is one of the candidates that guarantees an Obama win. That doesn't mean I hate Palin, or believe she is dumb. It just means I'm not blind. She'll get my vote if she's the candidate though.
So Sarah has high negatives?
Submitted by MikeB on Fri, 05/27/2011 - 5:06pm.
So Sarah has high negatives? According to today's Rasmussen Presidential Tracking poll, 37% of likely voters strongly disapprove of Obama, with 49% disapproving over all. Of the 41% that approve of Obama, only 25% strongly approve.
I think that if "Republicans" like Newt and McCain, et. al. quit badmouthing Sarah, her negatives would be greatly reduced. If right-wing talkers like O'Reilly, Hannity, Limbaugh, etc., got behind Sarah and put out information (not propaganda) on Sarah, and debunked all the smears started by the likes of DailyKos, Demcratic Underground, HuffingtonPost, and mindlessly repeated by the "news media", then Sarah could wipe the walls with Ear Leader.
If -- if -- . . .
Submitted by Galvanic on Sat, 05/28/2011 - 12:52pm.
Those are big "ifs" that have to align to make her viable. Here's the key if: "If Palin hadn't resigned from the Governors office in Alaska, she'd have a chance." Sad, but true.
As I wrote after the 2010 election, the tide has been running against the Democrats. And that was the same advantage the GOP had in 1996, when Clinton's popularity had plummeted and the Dems lost the Congress. But the GOP chose Dole as their candidate, and threw the opportunity away.
What's different now? As some have pointed out, the economy is worse, and that's a big negative for Obama. And if recovery continues to stall, he's in bigger trouble.
But if the GOP picks the wrong candidate, Obama wins.
She's a "distraction," alright.
Submitted by CobraMan on Fri, 05/27/2011 - 1:20pm.
She's a "distraction" alright. She keeps distracting the liberals from, how do they put it, "controlling the debate."
The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States. The US Constitution
Unless you're a fetus. The US Supreme Court
Or Anwar al-Awlaki.
they will tell us
Submitted by jazzact13 on Fri, 05/27/2011 - 1:23pm.
As Rush says, they will tell us who they fear.
"Thoroughly worldly people never understand even the world; they rely altogether on a few cynical maxims which are not true."
Chesterton, Orthodoxy
What a joke!
Submitted by motherbelt on Fri, 05/27/2011 - 1:27pm.
Gregory: Palin et al are "distractions."
Gregory: Paul Ryan is "hurting" the GOP
This is a news anchor???
Come on, President Obama, get him on your payroll and make an honest man out of him!!
Rush said it best today*
Submitted by cajun2 on Fri, 05/27/2011 - 1:42pm.
"Sarah Palin is not going to the back of the bus, she now has her own dam* bus!"
cajun-2, Spoiler !!! Rush is not on for another 40 minutes...
Submitted by upcountrywater on Fri, 05/27/2011 - 2:27pm.
No worries....
Flyby of flood control structures. last 30 seconds of comments, may be muted.
Still gushing big time.
You Didn't Build That.
Sorry upcountrywater*
Submitted by cajun2 on Fri, 05/27/2011 - 2:42pm.
I am a spoiler, my apology. Love the links. It is the Old River Structure that is causing us concern. Erosion is getting severe under the structure due to the force of flow. Morganza still has not crested and here we are concerned because of the heavy rains in the upper delta states.
We are facing continued threats of flooding until July. Those of us just outside the Basin would you believe are in the middle of a drought. Trees, crops, and grasses are dying. If we get rain, we flood. If we dont crops fail. My area is -18 " rainfall for the year. Something to think about.
Peculiar thing about valves...
Submitted by upcountrywater on Fri, 05/27/2011 - 4:37pm.
Sometimes one can't shut them off.
To bad, the levee from Old River to Morganza ain't hefty enough to handle the increased flow.
So the gang up river can shut -down, inspect, repair. That photo is Not on the Mississippi.
Entitlements over Infrastructure, every single time...
How about a 200 mile aqueduct for the parched areas, fat chance.
You Didn't Build That.
true upcountry*
Submitted by cajun2 on Fri, 05/27/2011 - 5:10pm.
We have an extensive system of canals and Bayous that would be helpful with an aqueduct but that water coming out of the Basin from "upnorth" is not the kind of water you want on your crops.
They are shutting down several gates at Morganza today. They hope to allow natural flow down river to subside a bit. Then as the water recedes, they will close more gates. When the water begins to rise again from the upper Delta states, they will then start opening gates again.
The amazing thing is that it takes hours to open just one gate and they can only open or close 2-4 a day because of the tremendous force of the water. This is why they are saying this will be a summer long endeavor.
We have seen photos sadly, dead dear, black bears and wild boar. The water is rushing too fast for them to escape. Hundreds of WLF staff, National Guard, and Animal activists groups are here as well trying to protect the wildlife. The heat index is around 95 every day. Kudos to all those willing to work so hard in this heat. And thank you again ups for following our plight even though the media is on to more important things, like Awnold has "outside" children.
Sarah Palin is feared by the
Submitted by talkradio55 on Fri, 05/27/2011 - 1:44pm.
Sarah Palin is feared by the drive-bys and the Commie libs because she could wipe the floor with Obamachev with her pinkie finger. She is 100 million times smarter than Obama and then some. They all know it, which is why they spend all their time trying to destroy her. Palin is hated by the Left because she is a real person, a genuine conservative, a person who's character can be vouched for, as opposed to Obamachev, who is a genuine phony and a fraud. Obamachev is like the $3 bill of politics, a phony from front to back who when up against a real person (Palin), would not have a snowball's chance in hell.
And Obama is sooooo smart
Submitted by Blonde on Fri, 05/27/2011 - 1:50pm.
....that he stammers intellectually, you know, because his brain moves so much faster than his mouth does. While Palin is a total idiot, because Tina Fey can see Russia from Palin's living room.
You can't make this stuff up. Did I mention Obama is more Irish than JFK? Most Irish president evah!
Election insurance indeed.
Handy Reference Guide to Obama's Gaffes and Goofs ~ Currently Numbering 200 (and Counting)
Pfft. I know a secular Jew who is more Irish than Obama.
Submitted by SickofLibs on Fri, 05/27/2011 - 2:45pm.
At least he says he is.
Tee hee.
"Election insurance
Submitted by stratman on Sat, 05/28/2011 - 12:56am.
The Dems better buy additional policies for flood and earthquake damage because Obama is a walking fault line of economic destruction downstream from a New Orleans' levee barely holding back his collective and monumental blunders and embarrassments from cascading down on voters' consciousness.
All that's needed is a coordinated effort by the RNC and Republican presidential candidate to use the ammunition so plentifully provided by Obama and the Left. It really should be a turkey shoot to vote out the turkey in the Oval Office.
Have a contest
Submitted by DontFeedTheTrolls on Fri, 05/27/2011 - 1:51pm.
Take Obama and Palin, throw them both in some wooded wilderness, naked, with only a Swiss Army knife, 25 miles from the nearest road, and the survivor gets to be President.
And I would bet Palin could
Submitted by Free Stinker on Fri, 05/27/2011 - 2:23pm.
And I would bet Palin could survive without the knife too.
/// Sarah Palin Fan since July 11, 2007 /// خال
Unfortunately for Palin, the election isn't about . . .
Submitted by Galvanic on Fri, 05/27/2011 - 6:38pm.
. . . wilderness survival.
Obama has lots of negatives, but he's got no opponents in the primaries, and he's got the resources that incumbent Presidents enjoy.
He can be beat, but Palin isn't the candidate to get the job done.
Then, who is?
I don't know. The declared candidates aren't that impressive from my perspective, but then, I don't vote for Democrats and Republicans, so generally they never appeal to me.
Palin is indeed the one to do
Submitted by Free Stinker on Fri, 05/27/2011 - 6:53pm.
Palin is indeed the one to do it. Don't allow the MSM to tell you who is and isn't electable.
Reagan couldn't beat Carter (oops)
Mondale (84) was unstopable
"where was George? (88)
Clinton needed a strong 3rd party to get elected.
And Bush-43 was unelectable then he was nor re-electable.
/// Sarah Palin Fan since July 11, 2007 /// خال
Rerun...3 rd party testing the waters.
Submitted by upcountrywater on Fri, 05/27/2011 - 7:37pm.
Only way for Obama to win is to organize ... nationalize stuff like this.
Democratic candidate Kathy Hochul won with 47 percent of the vote, GOP candidate Jane Corwin got 43 percent, and “Tea Party” candidate Jack Davis came in with 9 percent.
Now if only Carter thought of that.
You Didn't Build That.
UCW
Submitted by Free Stinker on Fri, 05/27/2011 - 9:34pm.
I suspect Obama is going to need more than a 3rd party. Remember "Republican" John Anderson in the 1980 Race running as an Indie?
/// Sarah Palin Fan since July 11, 2007 /// خال
Perot sticks in my head, the billionaire. Soros is a billionaire
Submitted by upcountrywater on Fri, 05/27/2011 - 10:13pm.
Anderson had no wads of cash, like today's billionaire boys club.
Be nice if there is only 2 parties competing for President.
You Didn't Build That.
To my knowledge, none of the candidates you listed . . .
Submitted by Galvanic on Sat, 05/28/2011 - 1:39pm.
. . . ever resigned from an elected executive office. Palin's resignation is the albatross around her neck, regardless her rationale for doing so.
And the question will come up in the very first debate, GOP or otherwise: "You resigned your office as Governor of Alaska before completing your term. Why should voters believe that you won't resign from the Presidency when things get tough?"
If won't matter one bit what her answer is, it will remind the voters that she quit, and they'll write her off.
She resigned so she could
Submitted by Free Stinker on Sat, 05/28/2011 - 1:48pm.
She resigned so she could "take the fight tp Obama". She is the de facto leader of the oppossion.
No one complained that obama biden and Hillary resigned their seats in the senate
/// Sarah Palin Fan since July 11, 2007 /// خال
Right or Wrong
Submitted by IgnatzJFahrquar on Fri, 05/27/2011 - 2:11pm.
Sarah will need to be perfect in her campaign. No stumbles on this doctrine or that. These filthy media hyenas will just latch on to any foible and be relentless.
You would think by now she has been fully vetted by the talking jackasses and that they have run out of gotchas. Don't forget the book being written by that creep that moved in next door. He's probably pee'd himself multiple times in anticipation of her jumping into the race.
While it certainly would not be a fair fight due to the MSM jackals, it is reality.
Palin gets my vote
Submitted by vote24 on Sat, 05/28/2011 - 12:31am.
If you are even remotely conservative and believe one word the media says you have already lost the game. It is better, if you're not sure, to think, feel, and do, the exact opposite of what the liberal media tells you to. I will vote Palin because I like what she says ,how she says it, and believe she can and will follow through. I don't see one other possible candidate I can say that about. If you really dissagree with her, and her positions and policy ideas, then fine, don't vote for her. But you may not be as conservative as you think. If you believe Palin can not win, you have already given in to the opposition. Come on now folks. The future is this way.
"...then fine, don't vote for
Submitted by Chris Norman on Sat, 05/28/2011 - 12:46am.
"...then fine, don't vote for her. But you may not be as conservative as you think."
With all due respect to both you and Gov. Palin, since when is she the standard by which true conservatism is measured?
What he said vs. what he meant
Submitted by sherlock1 on Fri, 05/27/2011 - 2:21pm.
What he said: "Well, we know she galvanizes Republicans, but she also does not have a high favorability rating in the national electorate."
What he meant: "Well, we know she galvanizes Republicans, but she also does not have a high favorability rating with us in the mainstream media."
The MSM has a new favorite customer, and it isn't us.
The Dems should run Obama.
Submitted by P. Aaron on Fri, 05/27/2011 - 2:23pm.
The Dems should run Obama.
I Doubt It
Submitted by JustAl on Sat, 05/28/2011 - 9:25am.
Few cross the Clintons and get away with it, nobody does it twice. Hildabeast will end up use "O" as a "photo op" in her campaign.
Another Vote for Palin
Submitted by Utherpend on Fri, 05/27/2011 - 2:29pm.
She has had my vote since 2008.
Dear Utherpend:
Submitted by jpwcpa on Fri, 05/27/2011 - 6:04pm.
Please explain what you mean by this comment. We are still in 2008.
Thanks,
-Barack Obama
Palin Has Already Exposed Hypocrisy of Feminists and MSM
Submitted by iamsaved on Fri, 05/27/2011 - 2:32pm.
The attacks on Sarah Palin beginning with the 2008 campaign showed the glaring hypocrisy of both so-called feminists and the so-called ethical journalists. The feminists attacks proved they are for women's rights only if the woman is a liberal and the yellow journalists for their unfettered bias in their reporting. Josef Goebbels would have been proud.
I've learned if the source is the AP, NYT, ABC, CBS, NBC, MSNBC, CNN and others of their ilk, double check the facts and look for what they failed to say.
If they attack a conservative viciously and often, they're frightened. Do the opposite of what they suggest. Liberals have always reminded me of the old Dracula movies when the vampire came into contact with holy water; a cross, or sunlight. Oh the horror!
I hope both Sarah Palin and Rick Perry jump into the fray. Whichever of the candidates wins the primary, I'll vote for willingly - not holding my nose like I did for John McCain. As long as its not Obama or any other Democrat.
If Obama wins, start counting the days until the influence of this country shrinks like the influence did for the empire where the "sun never set" faded away.
Is this a sort of "Obamascare"? You better believe it.
No way the MSM is going to
Submitted by Free Stinker on Fri, 05/27/2011 - 2:52pm.
No way the MSM is going to allow Obama to debate Palin. Mr corpse-man will be made a fool of in front of a national audience and no MSM spin would be able to fix that.
/// Sarah Palin Fan since July 11, 2007 /// خال
If you don't view the MSM as a solid arm of the Democratic Party
Submitted by gopcongress on Fri, 05/27/2011 - 3:07pm.
If you don't view the MSM as a solid arm of the Democratic Party, then you don't deserve to run for office as a conservative.
It is that simple. ANY media request other than by Fox should be considered a request to be interrogated, and propagandized, by the Democratic party. Their is NO REASON to acquiesce to a mainstream media interview, unless it is done in terms that are highly controllable.
GOP candidates can NOT expect to have ANY semblance of fairness when interrogated by the mainstream media / democratic PR branch. All answers or comments will be construed in the most negative manner possible.
It is that simple: The mainstream media are NEITHER mainstream, NOR media in its truest form. Pure and simple.
"The news and truth are not the same thing." -Walter Lippmann (1889-1974) FOLLOW ME ON TWITTER
What?
Submitted by grammajane on Fri, 05/27/2011 - 3:52pm.
What is obama going to run on?? Unemployment, debt, war, foreclosers, 47,000.000 on food stamps, healthcare, spending, socialist ideas,.........most things Americans are sick of?? What possible agenda does he have to make things worse. Palin is so feared and that is good reason for the media to keep on bashing her and any other Republican who will run. Fear brings out the worst in todays media
Well
Submitted by IgnatzJFahrquar on Fri, 05/27/2011 - 4:07pm.
He single-handedly found and killed Usama bin Laden.
Yeah,
Submitted by Chaitealover on Fri, 05/27/2011 - 4:16pm.
but what has he done lately? :-)
Obama can and will be defeated in 2012.
Submitted by acaiguana on Fri, 05/27/2011 - 5:09pm.
He has a record. It is a record to absolute disaster and poverty for America.
Palin has a record also. It is a record of success after success. Being hitched to a loser like McCain was the only good thing that happened to McCain during 2008.
She resigned for good reason her Governorship and I for one, think she made the right decision. But that is just me. Everyone else has to try to put themselves in her shoes and decide what they would have done and whether they would have stayed for two years of brutal pseudo ethics litigation; insane national brow-beating over all the complaints; all the while being constrained by the rules to not defend herself publicly or to address the root causes of the spurious allegations and accusations.
She still makes one tweet and creates more honest intellectual debate that Barry does with 50 speeches. Well, except for when Barry tries to pull a fast one on Israel.
I'm not a Romney fan, nor a fan of several other potential or current candidates. Cain, Palin, possibly one or two others might excite me again.
But the brutal truth is we just need to get out and work and vote and campaign and canvass our neighborhoods and do whatever it takes to beat these idiots; including the Democrats left in the House and Senate.
ACA
...
Quoted from: 'Acaiguana notes from the Underground' (Soon to be at theaters near you)
The Biggest Fear For All Liberals...
Submitted by Bill Brasky on Fri, 05/27/2011 - 7:19pm.
Is Sarah Palin defeating Obama in the 2012 election. You might see mass suicide (one can hope!). It is a mainstream media myth that Palin cannot win. I am certain there are far more people in this country that can relate to Sarah Palin than Obama. And now that Oblowhole has a long record of failure and ineptitude, it is far from a lock that he get re-elected. No matter what the media cheerleaders say.
logic
Submitted by MidAmerica on Fri, 05/27/2011 - 7:29pm.
As Rush says over and over... if they really thought Palin was such an easy person to beat they would be promoting her every way they could.
Indeed. The only liberals
Submitted by Free Stinker on Fri, 05/27/2011 - 8:01pm.
Indeed. The only liberals who you see hoping Sarah runs are thd peanut galleries over at HuffPoo, DUH-lyKoz and Wonkette. Are they going to be in for a surprise.
Those are the same crowd that claim McCain cheated (by getting the questions in advance) for the "Rick Warren debate". Remember that one? Obama wasn't giving a prepared speech and looked like the unqualified idiot that he actually is.
/// Sarah Palin Fan since July 11, 2007 /// خال
Sarah scares libs
Submitted by Richard.Halavais on Sat, 05/28/2011 - 8:26am.
Liberals, democrats like little children on a school yard playground taunt those who frighten them most. They attack Sarah Palin simply because she scares the shlt out of them. They have 70 years of lying, planning, scheming, plotting and working to destroy our country and along comes some attractive, intelligent, charismatic unknown woman who isn't even from an ivy league school and threatens to ruin it in just one election. My God, horrors, the sky is falling. And just like the sheep they are every one of them takes up the same theme and tows the party line.
Our country achieved greatness because when our forefathers left Europe for the new land they left behind the genes of fear and the nanny state liberal equivalents. Our country grew and became strong while we had to bail out Europe with their wars and their failures. Slowly, when the offspring of the cowards we left behind felt safe enough they came here too and they brought their failed liberal, communist, big government views with them. they slowly took over. Now instead of Daniel Boone and Davey Crockett and even John Wayne we have metrosexuals and Sean Penn and the Michael Moores infesting us with their crap, We have liberals he ll bent on taking away our guns and teachers who turn playgrounds into sissygrounds and punish kids who fight back,
God help us, Where is left for real men and women to go?
I (embarrassingly) remember
Submitted by HockeyKid on Sat, 05/28/2011 - 9:56am.
the leadup to 1980, when the libs (myself included at the time) had pegged Carter as a runaway winner against that has-been actor who was so bad even at acting that he did movies with monkeys.
I now look back on that as proof that Sarah could win, and win big!
"Beauty is only skin deep, but liberal's to the bone." - me
You remember 1980 differently than me
Submitted by Galvanic on Sat, 05/28/2011 - 1:49pm.
Everyone I knew -- Democrat and Republican -- spoke of Carter's Administration as a disaster. Even those who preferred Carter to Reagan believed that the Carter was vulnerable.
Galvanic
Submitted by Free Stinker on Sat, 05/28/2011 - 6:11pm.
Seeing as you apparently didn't vote for Reagan, I'm not too worried that you don't want to vote for Palin either.
/// Sarah Palin Fan since July 11, 2007 /// خال