It's Time To Move Beyond Palin

The Editors

We live in serious times. We face a huge fiscal crisis, both now and in the long-term. We are experiencing a frustratingly slow pace of job creation. Middle class families are not doing much better than they were a decade ago. The threats to our national security are not going away. And to top it all off, state finances are in shambles and will create an additional burden for policymakers in Washington that we are only now coming to terms with. The United States of America faces the greatest combined threat to our future prosperity and stability than we have faced since the 1930s - at least.

For these reasons, we need a strong, serious, decisive leader on the Republican ticket in 2012. 

Let's face it. Sarah Palin is clearly not that leader. 

She's fun. She's attractive. She's appealing. She's down-home. She's got a populist vibe. She shoots animals. But she's not presidential timber. Not in times like these.

Now, she took some highly unfair criticism in the wake of the Tucson tragedy, and she was roundly defended by many smart commentators. But then she waded into the controversy the day of the President's speech and couldn't help but to bring the attention back to herself.

And this is the problem with Sarah Palin. There is often no other story about her than...her.

We live in consequential, even treacherous, times, and if Palin's serious about becoming President, she needs to address the nation with ideas, solutions, and the sobriety our times require, not with "WTFs" or other gimmicks aimed at getting attention. Otherwise, she should step aside. 

Because of her popularity, many have been afraid to say openly about her what they whisper in private. But a few brave souls have stepped out and said about Sarah Palin what others think but are unwilling to say. 

We call this group the Truth Tellers - it's hard to argue with their statements about Sarah Palin. See below for what they have said about her. Here's a summary of the main points:

• Palin is unserious about ideas and doesn't seem to care much about providing clear, decisive leadership on the biggest issues facing America. It's hard to find much evidence to the contrary. Can her supporters provide compelling evidence to refute this? We have looked, and we can't find the evidence. Other than a smart QE2 statement that the Wall Street Journal applauded, there's not much there.
• There is no obvious route for her to the White House. Have any of her supporters mapped out how she wins in a way that's half-way believable? We're not sure there is one. We take Roger Simon's point under advisement - that it is too soon to rule Sarah out - but so far, it's not clear how she wins. Someone needs to build a good case before we'll change our minds, because we sure don't see it.
• Instead of replying to detractors with presidential aplomb or directing the public discussion away from criticism to a positive view of the future, she is alienating and even defensive. Some may think this a subjective assessment, but it's hard to argue with the charge that she spends far too much time dueling with the media or using the media to duel with others than to present any positive vision of the future. Whatever their flaws, Mitt Romney and Mike Huckabee and Newt Gingrich and Tim Pawlenty, Chris Christie, and Mitch Daniels have all carved out identities based on specific ideas, policy, and vision. What is Sarah Palin's vision? What are her ideas? Can anyone convincingly answer those questions? 

So let's take a look at the Truth Tellers in their own words:

January 2010

In his column in the New York Times, Ross Douthat compared Palin's relationship with the media to a dysfunctional marriage, and that the way she presents herself in statements and online posts is often self indulgent and superficial:

Palin...officially despises the “lamestream” media. But press coverage — good, bad, whatever — is clearly the oxygen she craves. She supposedly hates having her privacy invaded, yet her family keeps showing up on reality TV. She thinks the political class is clueless and out-of-touch, but she can’t resist responding to its every provocation. Her public rhetoric, from “death panels” to “blood libel,” is obviously crafted to maximize coverage and controversy, and generate more heat than light. And her Twitter account reads like a constant plea for the most superficial sort of media attention.

Douthat went on to offer her some advice:

To Palin: You were an actual politician once (remember that?), but you’re becoming the kind of caricature that your enemies have always tried to make of you. So maybe it’s time to turn off your iPad for a while, and take a break from Facebook and Fox News. The world won’t end if you don’t respond to every criticism, and you might even win a few more admirers if you cultivated a lighter touch and a more above-the-fray persona. Oh, and when that reality-TV producer sends you a pitch for “Sarah Plus Five Plus Kate Plus Eight,” just say no.

Former House Speaker and potential 2012 candidate Newt Gingrich in an interview on ABC's Good Morning America said Palin needs show more tact in her statements:

I think that she has got to slow down and be more careful and think through what she’s saying and how she’s saying it.

On Anderson Coopers 360, former White House Press Secretary Ari Feischer commented that while she has proved to be very successful in mobilizing the GOP base, she has yet to demonstrate she has the substance to take her political ambitions to the next level:

Sarah Palin is tremendously popular within an element of the Republican Party. And the trick to making it in American politics is, you have got to start strong in your base and being able expanding over the middle. She's yet to be able to prove that she can take that second step. It's an important second step, if she's going to have greater credibility and -- and any advancement in politics. 

December 2010

Charles Krauthammer, in response to a round table discussion on potential GOP nominees, said he doubts Palin’s strength as a candidate:

What do you mean if not Sarah Palin in 2012? Who’s saying she’s going to be the presidential candidate? I don’t even hear her saying it. Her chances of being are smaller than half a dozen other people. If you talk to Republicans, I don’t think there are what, more than one in three who would tell you she has a chance of winning the presidency or even the nomination….And she is not the favorite…she has a very strong core constituency but outside of that I think she is rather weak.

Krauthammer has also previously commented about the weak nature of her impact:

She is — she has star power without any doubt. She has an extremely devoted following. But she is not a serious candidate for the presidency.  She had to go home and study and spend a lot of time on issues in which she was not adept last year, and she hasn't. She has to stop speaking in clichés and platitudes. It won't work.  It could work for eight weeks if you're the number two candidate, as she was last year. But even so, she got singed a lot in that campaign. You cannot sustain a campaign of platitudes and clichés over a year and a half if you're running for the presidency.

…Jonathan Tobin concurred with Krauthammer’s assessment via Commentary Magazine:

Palin’s resentment of the Washington establishment and perhaps even of such intellectual gatekeepers of the conservative movement as Krauthammer may resonate with many conservative voters, but her attitude (which is the opposite of conservative icon Ronald Reagan’s genial responses to hostile media) alienates everyone else. Everything she does and says lately seems geared toward reinforcing the negative opinion of that 60 percent already convinced that she isn’t qualified to be the commander in chief. And there’s simply no way that a person that six out of 10 voters wouldn’t vote for under any circumstances can be elected president. So, rather than taunting people like Krauthammer, who merely said aloud what so many others are thinking about her unpresidential demeanor, maybe Sarah Palin ought to be waking up to the fact that she is simply unelectable.

…while Pete Wehner, a former Bush official, agreed with Tobin’s appraisal: 

If his words cause this kind of bristling, defensive response from her, she is simply unprepared to endure a presidential run, quite apart from her disquieting (and quite striking) inability to engage in a serious discussion about policy. Virtually every time Ms. Palin speaks out, she reinforces some of the worst impressions or deepest concerns many of us have about her. If she were to become the voice and representative of the GOP and the modern conservatism movement, both would suffer a massive rejection. Sarah Palin will not be elected president; and for her sake, I hope she decides not to run.

Republican strategist John Feehery, a contributor to The Hill's Pundits Blog, called her out on her lack of credibility:

It was Abraham Lincoln who said that  “it is better to be silent and be thought a fool than it is to speak up and remove all doubt.” Palin, the more she speaks out on topics like this, the more she is removing all doubt."

November 2010

George Will on ABC’s This Week also weighed in on Palin’s lack of relevant experience:

She had to go home to Alaska and study, and she had to govern Alaska well. Instead, she quit halfway through her first term and shows up in the audience of ‘Dancing with the Stars’ and other distinctly non-presidential venues.

And who can forget Joe Scarborough’s “hum dinger” in Politico calling for critics to “man up” to their real critique on Palin:

What man or mouse with a fully functioning human brain and a résumé as thin as Palin’s would flirt with a presidential run? It makes the political biography of Barack Obama look more like Winston Churchill’s.  Adding audacity to this dopey dream is that Palin can’t stop herself from taking swings at Republican giants. In the past month alone, she has mocked Ronald Reagan’s credentials, dismissed George H.W. and Barbara Bush as arrogant ‘blue bloods’ and blamed George W. Bush for wrecking the economy. Wow. That’ll win ’em over in Iowa.

David Frum, in an entertaining comparison, likened her presence on the political stage to a piano, dangerously “dangling” over the Republican party’s head:

Imagine you’re at the circus. On the ground is a poodle performing a stunt. Above the clown’s head, dangling from a thin wire, is a piano. The piano is teetering, tottering, looking as if at any moment it might slip, crash to earth, and crush the dog. Impossible not to watch, right? And that’s the Palin show, only this time with the party of Lincoln as the little dog, and Sarah Palin as the piano.

While Mona Charen on NRO, in response to Palin’s war with the media, said “give her a TV show, not the presidency":

Palin compares herself to Reagan. But Reagan didn’t mud-wrestle with the press. Palin seems consumed and obsessed by it, as her rapid Twitter finger attests, and thus she encourages the sniping. She should be presiding over meetings on oil and gas leases in the North Slope, or devising alternatives to Obamacare. Every public spat with Dave Letterman or Politico, or the “lamestream media,” or (God help us) Levi Johnston, diminishes her.

Charen, while paying credit to Palin’s strengths, goes on to add:

Palin has many strengths. I admire her fortitude and her principles…She would be terrific as a talk-show host — the new Oprah. But a presidential candidate? Someone to convince critical independent voters that Republicans can govern successfully? Absolutely not.

In a Daily Beast post entitled “Sarah, Don’t Run,” while also giving her credit for her “phenomenal" leverage of the spotlight, Mark McKinnon added:

If Palin runs, I think the entire Republican primary process will be hijacked. With ardent fans and a rabid media, it will become Palin-palooza. A celebrity fest will follow with even more amplitude than the adulation and adoration that surrounded Barack Obama, who was so revered he was sometimes referred to in biblical proportions as “The One.” An all-consuming super nova, Palin will suck the oxygen out of every room, everywhere she goes. And one of two things will happen. Discerning conservative voters in early primary states will be offended by the circus-like atmosphere and the presumption that they could so easily fall for a “cult of personality.” And they will vote against her. And she will lose. Or, Republican voters will be completely swept up in the mania and nominate her as the GOP standard bearer to go up against President Obama. And she will lose—by a greater margin than any other Republican nominee who would run – and lose – in  2012.

And in reply to Palin’s snide response to interview questions at the expense of Ronald Reagan, Peggy Noonan urged Americans to vote for maturity (i.e. not Sarah Palin), comparing the former Governor of Alaska to a “nincompoop”:

You have to earn your way into politics. You should go have a life, build a string of accomplishments, then enter public service. And you need actual talent: You have to be able to bring people in and along. You can't just bully them, you can't just assert and taunt, you have to be able to persuade. Americans don't want, as their representatives, people who seem empty or crazy. They'll vote no on that. It's not just the message, it's the messenger.

Although a more moderate Republican, Alaska Senator Lisa Murkowski, who has a notoriously strained relationship with the former Governor, said of her skills:

I just do not think she has those leadership qualities, that intellectual policy, that allows for building good and great policies. You know, she was my governor for two years, for just about two years there, and I don't think that she enjoyed governing.  I don't think she liked to get down into the policy. I want someone who goes to bed at night and wakes up in the morning thinking about how we're going to deal with" key issues.

Former First Lady, Barbara Bush politely offered her opinion:

I sat next to her once. Thought she was beautiful. And she's very happy in Alaska, and I hope she'll stay there.

October 2010 

In an interview with The Telegraph, responding to Palin’s recent aspirations for reality TV stardom, Karl Rove said of her 2012 bid: 

Being the vice-presidential nominee on the ticket is different from saying 'I want to be the person at the top of the ticket,'" Rove continued. "There are high standards that the American people have for [the presidency] and they require a certain level of gravitas, and they want to look at the candidate and say 'that candidate is doing things that gives me confidence that they are up to the most demanding job in the world."

July 2010 

Daniel Larison in The American Conservative Magazine, cited her as a very “polarized” and isolating candidate:

[“S]he is not favorably viewed by all Republicans…As it is, she has just 66% favorability with self-identified Tea Party supporters, and she is supposed to be one of their political heroes. If she can’t even consolidate all of the Tea Party’s approximately 18% of the vote, why does anyone think she can win at least a third of the vote in primaries that she will need to get the nomination?  If she did somehow pull it off, Democrats would spend most of the summer and fall of 2012 rubbing their eyes in disbelief at their good fortune. Even in a fairly polarized national electorate where McCain/Palin could manage to get 47% of the vote in the midst of a financial meltdown at the tail end of the second term of one of the three most unpopular post-war Presidents, a ticket headed by Palin would be hard-pressed to break 40%. Palin as the nominee would probably make 2012 the most lopsided election victory for the incumbent President since 1984.

The Truth Tellers have spoken. If Sarah Palin wanted to be presidential, she might take the critiques to heart and begin to fashion arguments and a strategy that give voters the confidence she can lead the country. If she cannot do that, she should stay on the sidelines.

It's worth closing by noting, as Paul Begala has said, Democrats would love nothing more than to have "more Sarah Palin."  Recent polling shows that many liberals hope Palin will continue her presidential bid. One example of this point: PrimariesforPalin.com encourages non-Republican voters to support Palin during GOP primaries because “in head-to-head polls” Palin consistently fares worse than President Obama.

Let's go America. Let's move beyond Sarah Palin. Our times demand it.

If you are a Truth Teller, or want to recommend a commentator who is, email us here. 

Comments

[Vulture]

Case closed, I think. If Palin runs, Obama gets in again - and nothing could be worse than that.

[Mike Thomas]

I think the problem here is what you have just put right in front of us in this article.

"Of the people"

The country, not interest groups, not special sections. The people.

"By the people"

The commentators and politicians have got it wrong, time and time and time again, they don't want her but the public does.

"For the people"

Here lies the rub, this is government of the people, by the people, for the people.

Say what you like about Palin, like her or loathe her but she gets all three. I think she should take stock and simply re-adjust her approach a little.

[Steve]

The way I see it is that she has lost, if she ever indeed had any chance of winning, any public perception of competence. This may or may not be her own fault; personally I believe it to be her fault.

However, the ease of portraying her somewhere on the incompetent-lunatic spectrum, particularly in major opinion forming parts of the press and media, makes her an easy rival for the current President, who finds coming across serious as an easy task (helped by generous reporting of his rhetorical skills).

Vulture, the first poster, is correct; Palin is the candidate Obama will be hoping to face.

[dg]

Good idea, put up another liberal like McCain and lose again. :/

Bachmann/Palin 2012

[Dave B]

I thought Mrs Palin's response to the Tuscon thing was excellent.

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/256942/sarah-palin-americas-enduring-strength-nro-staff

[martin sewell]

I always takeCharles Krauthammer seriously.

It may be that Sarah Palin's role may be akin to that of George Wallace or Ross Perot- not to win but to be a game changer.

What she brings new to the Establishment party is a real connection with the values of ordinary America. I suspect that no GOP candidate who joins
the liberal sneering of her can achieve the necessary balance of outreaching to the unecoders whilst holding onto the core vote, or the newly active Tea Party voters. The platform for a winning candidate needs to be " Palin plus" "Sarah ..but". The phenomenon will be ignored at the GOP peril. Anyone who can build on the base with greater gravitas will look good against a President who will bring a bad record for judgement.

[Steevo]

I don't think she will run. She knows very very well the hatred of the progressive Left. Most of our legacy media would be against her every move. She couldn't breath without someone finding fault. She couldn't accomplish anything. I would think she also knows she and her family would be in danger of assassination. After the Tuscon killings and regardless of blatant facts explaining why, there were still enough sickos wanting her death and boldly stating so. It's what happens when so many in the media have painted her into an evil caricature.

A point to be made here as most who read this will be Brits. Conhome has used commentators who are of Conhome's opinion. There are many other conservatives who would disagree in significant ways, even if they like me still would not want her to run.

I wouldn't fancy yourselves as the Truth Tellers here. I'm not gonna go through every article with a contrary opinion than yours but a couple examples of interest...

On economic policy you might go here:

http://online.wsj.com/articl
/SB10001424052748703514904575602231815453378
.html?mod=WSJ_newsreel_opinion

Do a better search for George Will and don't just use a comment you want. Go here...

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content
/article/2010/02/17/AR2010021703507.html

I could go on about the lack of regard it seems most American conservative/libertarians have for people who've shown their foolishness and irrelevance to the movement. Like Joe Scarborro, Peggy Noonan (miss maturity who voted for Obama) and David Frum.

[abelard]

We really don't need Brits telling us who we should or should not vote for thank you..

Palin will make an excellent President

[Alan Carcas]

I think a lot of people, especially in the Tory Party, accepted Sarah Palin at face value because, a) she reminded them of Margaret Thatcher; b) she had been chosen by John McCain because we in the Tory Party trusted him as a Republican.

Oh, dear! How wrong we were on both counts. Sarah Palin is quite clearly a female red-neck American politician of the type that can be found in all aspects of American political, social and professional society, beloved of Hollywood, to name but a few. How the Republicans get out of this bind I don't know, but I suspect, deep down, and there is a depth to American society if you look hard enough, Palin has done the cause of women in American politics a great deal of harm. A bit like mad-Hatty Harman has here!

[Won't vote for anyone but Sarah]

Wow! So you're *this* afraid of her, eh? The 'please give it up already' is a pretty desperate last tactic.

Pathetic.

If this woman is really so awful, she won't get the nomination. If she gets the nomination, she can win.

I wish her all my best. If she did to America what she did to Alaska the world would be a much better place. Run, Sarah, run!

[Kirkian]

First of all, let's discount the views of the neo-conservatives in the disastrous Bush administration. They and their collaborators (mostly ex-Democrats) purged the Republican Party of traditional conservatives, Reaganites and libertarians.

Rove, Krauthammer, Frum, Tobin, Wehner and Will et al destroyed the Republican Party through their big government, war-mongering, anti-civil liberties liberalism.

Murkowski is a RINO. What has Peggy Noonan achieved apart from advising the West Wing? The only commentator worth reading on that list is Daniel Larison.

I can't help concluding that there is a massive neo-con/Israeli lobby campaign against the Palin candidacy. Their candidate would be Jeb Bush, much better than his brother or father, but there is no way that the Americans will vote in a 3rd Bush.

Let's look at the alternatives. Gringrich has too much baggage. Romney is a RINO with his own version of Obamacare. Huckabee and Santorum are religious nutters. At the moment, Mitch Daniels is the only candidate who could unite the Republican Party.

Conservative Home readers deserve real analysis rather than a puff piece that is merely promoting the neo-cons' campaign against Sarah Palin. F for failure!

[Paul Marks]

I am NOT a Palin supporter - but this article is no good.

Sarah Palin HAS suggested a lot of serious ideas - read her books and articles (they are full of serious and good ideas).

And quoting a lot of unprovoked attacks by establishment figures is absurd.

These are the people who gave the world George Walker Bush - i.e. wild govnernment spending on the fiscal side, and allowing Alan Greenspan at the Federal Reserve (and the Dems at Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac) to build up a vast credit money bubble.

And I will not even get into the wars.

Bush (the ESTABLISHMENT MAN - for all his Texas accent) led directly to Obama, he opened the door for him.

So the establishment should have a "moment of silent reflection" for the next few years. Perhaps Barbara Bush (and co) should go back to their "natural environment" - the local COUNTRY CLUB.

Or, even better, let them go off to war (as they love war so much).

At least Sarah Palin's son has joined up - where are the neocons? Did their applications for military service get lost in the mail?

By the way calling people "religous nutters" (and I am NOT supporter of Governor Huckabee) is no good. The vast majority of Republican voters are what you would call "religous nutters" - i.e. they are Christians who believe in the real existance of God and that Jesus is alive (not in a "very real sense" like a Church of England athiest) but really alive.

As for Mitch Daniels.

A direct connection to Bush (Budget Director), a tax increaser (at the State level) and someone who said there should be a "truce on social issues".

Sorry by the left will not accept a "truce" - they will carry on trying to destroy civil society, and getting the government to finance their efforts.

Bush had eight years to (for example) end taxypayer funding of "Planned Parenthood" (the abortion outfit who are also, as exposed recent days, are into child prostitution and other vile stuff) he FAILED.

Would Mitch Daniels with his "truce" end this funding? About as much chance of that as him getting the United States out of the neocons establishment war in Afghanistan.

A real attack on Sarah Palin would centre on her lack of experience (is two years as Governor enough)and her failure to denounce TARP in 2008.

It would NOT be about what a lot establishment neocons think about her.

[plod]

Abelard said
'We really don't need Brits telling us who we should or should not vote for thank you..'

Well, would you listen to anyone let alone us 'Brits'if we did and I personnaly do not care who runs for President in the US we have problems enough of our own thank you.

Lets face it, you are very good at telling others what to do but no good at humility.

[ConservativeHome USA]

Abelard: Thanks for your comment. Just to be clear: we are a site run by Americans for Americans and whoever else wants to read. Our views on Sarah Palin proceed from a deep concern over the future of our country and the need to find leaders who are prepared to handle the challenges ahead.

[Mark Hudson]

Palin lacks the basic intelligence for the role. Plain and simple. There are any number of plausible candidates upon the Republicans should focus in order to beat Barack H Obama. She is not one of them.

[Raymond]

Whether Palin runs for president or not, is up to her and the American people. For what it is worth, I find her an authentic voice and one I would support. As that song goes" she may not be a Harvard lawyer, but she knows the founding fathers well "! Would that we British Conservatives had such a authentic voice ! British Fox news now !

[anon]

Has Peggy Noonan ever met dave?

[local local]

Voters vote on the basis of the way the candidates are presented by the media. they are not generally engaged with the minutiae of policy or even "where" a candidate stands on the political spectrum - if there is such a thing.

Palin, sadly, attracts almost un-remittingly negative press and this would dog any campaign she might fight, for the nomination or even for the Presidency.

She has re-energised a non-religious, liberal, constitutionalist base. Those who want to be free and have Government serve them, not vice versa, but are not simply pro-life, gun-toters. That is something we should be glad of and thank her for.

But she ain't a Predisident.

[Fairfacts Media]

Come on ConHome?, can the timber of Sarah Palin be any worse than the inexperienced senator from Illinois who kept voting 'present.'?

The way the left and the soft right establishment attack her is a testament to the strength of Palin and how they all fear her.
Are we on the right going to do what the left tell us and choose the candidate that they want, or are we going to let the American right choose a candidate who is true to their values.

Likewise, should the UK Conservatives choose a leader who is conservative or should it let the BBC pick the leader for it?

Palin did so much to galvanise the opposition to Obama. The Republicans thought that they could survive only by accepting Obama's leftist agenda.
But Palin has show the way on smaller government and reducing the budget deficit.

Rather than the soft right attacking Palin, it should focus on the enemy, the hard left behind Obama and the extreme policies they seek.

We should also welcome the development of small government conservatives as they will save America and its way of life.

We need a Tea Party and many Sarah Palins in Britain too.

Just as in America though, I bet they would cause many sleepness nights for the establishment, be they RINOs in America or Posh Boys in Downing Street.

[AnotherBoleynGirl]

It is waaaaay past time.
I keep thinking of a comment attributed to Winston Churchill:
"Every dog has its day, and some days are longer than others."

[AnotherBoleynGirl]

And, another thing, I strongly suspect that her so-called "popularity" is vastly overrated. I, for one, am really tired of the constant merry-go-round of stupid publicity stunts over substance.

[HK]

I am a Conservative woman who has become very disappointed with Mrs.Palin, and many of my family and friends have been defecting from her camp as well. Why? We don't see the values and virtues that we hoped she would espouse and represent in her public appearances and statements. We don't see serious policy statements on Sanctity of Life, help for children with special needs, protection of marriage, help for the poor and unemployed, etc. Also, the virtues of civility, intellectual curiosity, and dignity seem lacking. The women in my circle don't run around putting their children on display-they are busy rearing their children and working in their homes or jobs. They don't use "flippin" and "WTF" and other crude slang. They don't have huge motor homes to galavant in to indulge in expensive outings. The more we get to know her, the more we realize she is not like the person she represented herself to be.
She has turned off a lot of family values voters who aren't from the Angry element of the Tea Party but are Conservative voters who were hoping for a serious modern woman who would champion the causes we so deeply believe need to be addressed in our country.

[dorsetdumpling]

Mrs Palin is considered to be a joke this side of the Atlantic....surely, American people, you don't want another Obama term, do you? Believe me, this is what you will get if Mrs Palin runs.

[SeeingDouble]

I think Sarah can't win against Obama for the simple reason that even this over the top, overly long RINO editorial can appear on a site calling itself "Conservative Home." The majority of the pundits, and not-so pundits quoted are known for being RINOs.

All of the claims made about Sarah here are in the same vein as when Reagan was running. Is she as smart as he was? How the hell would I know with even the alternate Press focussing on nothing but the latest MSM controversy, and endlessly sucking the wind out of her sails to ask about the latest MSM controversy, and pushing her to answer her detractors. BUT THE BLAMING HER FOR BEING A CONTROVERSY HOUND AND FOR NOT BEING SUBSTANTIVE!!!

Why don't you Ivy League RINOs let us know who you've anointed as President, and we'll bend to your all-knowing wills. No sense in our imagining in middle American that this is anything but an oligarchy.

[Martin Marprelate]

Surely for the ranks of Republican Senators, Congressman and Governors they can find two people to stand for President and Vice-President respectively who woudl be more electible than Sarah palin? Inded if they want to defeat Obama in Nov 2012 they should keeo the lady from Alaska off the ticket and out of the way.