Don't forget "bitter" and "clinging to guns and religion."
Lot of good entries all around for the political almanac.
Posted on 10/30/2008 8:23:40 AM PDT by lewisglad
Palin is too much fun to send back to Alaska DALE MCFEATTERS
WASHINGTON -- Just when things seemed darkest for the journalism racket the news gods smiled -- only briefly, as it turned out -- and bestowed Sarah Palin upon us.
However the campaign turns out, we can't let her go back to Alaska. She's too much fun.
Just recently she was the cause of a great new contribution to our political vocabulary -- "gone rogue." As in a McCain campaign insider's observation that in Palin's increasing tendency to depart from the script prepared for her the vice presidential candidate "has gone rogue on us."
The campaign seemed stunned that the woman they proudly labeled a "maverick" maybe really is a maverick.
The New York Times had a very funny account of Palin suddenly stopping to take questions from a local TV crew and her traveling press corps. The Times account of what followed:
" 'Get Tracey,' one campaign aide barked into his headset, calling for Tracey Schmitt, Palin's ever-watchful spokeswoman, who rushed over to supervise the impromptu press conference. (Schmitt, looking distressed, tried several times to cut it off with a terse 'Thank you!' in between questions, to no avail.)"
Later that day Palin again broke free from her handlers to talk to the reporters, causing one to observe later that she was evolving "from the least accessible to the most accessible of the four candidates."
All this has led to the sort of speculation we in the dwindling band of mainstream media love. John Dickerson wrote " ... political insiders have started asking whether Palin is intentionally ignoring the playbook. And if it's intentional, the question becomes: Is she putting her own political self-interest ahead of her running mate's?"
The political pundits were ready with an answer. Roger Simon wrote in Politico, "Sarah Palin may soon be free. Soon, she may not have the millstone of John McCain around her neck. And she can begin her race for president in 2012."
We haven't even finished the longest, most grueling presidential race in our history and already we're talking about the next one. Palin in '12. And why not? The right wing of the Republican Party, the only wing that counts -- at least until next Tuesday, loves her so she has a ready-made base.
But she can't run from president from Alaska. Reporters will go to Iowa in January and New Hampshire in February but asking them to go to Alaska is a bit much. Besides, the time zones just kill you on deadlines.
The cell door hasn't even slammed shut on poor old Ted Stevens and already there is speculation -- and the Internet has given a tremendous boost to the groundless speculation industry -- that she will appoint herself to his Senate seat if he has to resign.
Her supporters say that short of the vice presidency she would never trade Alaska for Washington, D.C. But maybe not. The flap over the $150,000 wardrobe gave rise to even more speculation. (The McCain campaign says it returned a third of the wardrobe but that still leaves $100,000 worth of glad rags.)
Tina Brown, the former editor of The New Yorker who knows about these matters, says, "The notion that after the campaign they'll make her give the new wardrobe back, by the way, is palpably ridiculous. Don't we want Sarah Palin to look hot?" We do, we do.
She says no woman who has worn a $2,500 silk Valentino jacket is going to go back to wearing consignment shop clothes or, having had a personal hairdresser, to having her hair done at the Beehive in Wasilla.
Brown too thinks Palin is now campaigning for her future more than the ticket. Love her or hate her -- Christopher Hitchens calls her "a religious fanatic and a proud, boastful ignoramus" -- in two short months, Sarah Palin has made it hard to imagine politics without her.
You betcha.
It’s called nitpicking
I guessed as much given your FReeper name
LOL
Instead of blaming Jorge El Segundo and McCain, in the event McCain loses, they are preparing to blame McCain's loss - if he loses, on Palin to stop her from running successfully in 2012.
That is what is MOST dangerous about an Obama victory. It will give the demons in the media left the opportunity to have succeeded in selecting the two candidates they wanted most to run for office: McCain and Obama. And they will try it again. Nothing succeeds like success.
Conservatives should close ranks after the election - regardless of teh outcome and refuse to allow the media to Bork and Quayle a great Conservative and courageous American - Sarah Palin.
You are presuming McCain/Palin will lose. Not the right attitude.
If McCain loses. which I think he will win.
But if so. We have not seen the last of Sarah Louise Heath Palin.
She has a voice that makes people stop and listen. She will use the media to her advantage. She will run against Obama the same way Barry Goldwater planned on running against Jack Kennedy.
Everybody knows what makes Sarah Palin so successful; her word is good, she does what's right for the people and not what the Repub Party tells her to do, and she's tough as nails; doesn't ever flinch in her convictions. Todd would do the same.
I thought that report was based on an ABC lie which took Palin's remark out of context to indicate that she was talking about 2012 but in fact she was talking about winning this election.
Every time I see Governor Palin on TV, alone or with her family, I cheer and yell at the TV “God bless you real good, Miss Sarah!” She is for-real, regular people, and the type of person I could easily see living our neighborhood with her family. If she runs in 2012, I will crawl over broken glass to vote for her.
Give me a break! Every election the squishy moderate side of the party comes forth and announces that the only way to win is to be more "centrist" and ever since Reagan they've been winning. Some examples where conservatives were ignored, the party suffered:
I could go on but for 25 years the GOP has been taking conservatives for granted and chasing the moderate vote with liberal policies. The only time that was turned back was when Newt came up with the conservative Contract with America. But when the heat got turned up the moderates dumped Newt and went back to their fruitless effort to out liberal the democrats.
If the ultimate moderate in the GOP loses the election, you can bet that the intelligentsia at the top of the party will say "I got a fever, and the only prescription is more liberalism from our party!" and they'll get it most likely.
; )
LOL
That’s possible.
Excellent comparison.
So, they get to switch hunting moose and caribou for whitetails in VA. Maybe some quail hunting, certainly good waterfowling on the Chesapeake. Might be nice for something different for a few years.
Don't forget "bitter" and "clinging to guns and religion."
Lot of good entries all around for the political almanac.
Creationists don’t evolve. They’re sanctified.
Looking at the crowds and the enthusiasm at her rallies, compared to McCain's, I'd say McCain would do himself a world of good if he'd follow Sarah's model.....
Some good fishing and crabbing up that way, too. However, it's a real sacrifice when you consider that every aspect of your life will be managed to the Nth degree for the duration of your term.....it's no wonder the majority of politicians are power-hungry dweebs. Most ordinary folks want nothing to do with politics and for good reason......
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.