Depends on what you mean by "nailed." If you mean the perfect Leftist spin-framing for the further political undermining of Sarah, then you're right. But if you mean an accurate summation of her political power and abilities, you're sadly mistaken.
This article carefully distances itself from the rabid attacks first used, but just as carefully sets up the next stage of aggression against her, by arguing that her popularity is similiar to Obama's inexperience and mindless adulation and McCain's impotent neutrality. As well, even though it deplores the savaging of Sarah's intelligence, it spends a lot of effort trying to accomplish the same thing through faint praise and the subtle demeaning of the seriousness of her accomplishments.
And it even tries to justify these opinions as fair and balanced by creating - at the beginning and then again at the end of the article - bizarre political definitions and equations that suppose constitutional conservatism is merely a groups of balancing opinions against supposedly equally reasonable leftist state domination theories.
No, this piece is the sharpening of knives. And as far as a hint as to who might be behind it, the following quote from the article gives a bit of a clue: "Indeed, most of this elites prominent members hail from middle-class origins and not from traditional bastions of American privilege and wealth. They can speak of growing up in Scranton, even as they raise their noses at dirty coal and hunting season."
Now let's see... just which "prominant, elite" political figure with "middle-class, anti-dirty coal and hunting season" roots going back to "Scranton" might be threatened by Sarah?
Great post Talisker - it is YOU who has nailed it!!