Addressing the National Tea Party Convention in Nashville, Tenn., Feb. 6.
Posted on 02/17/2010 6:11:12 PM PST by GOP_Lady
Her obsession with the politics of grievance puts her at odds with Ronald Reagan.
From the day she turned heads at the 2008 Republican Convention—becoming at once an object of fevered controversy—one truth about Sarah Palin stood clear: She was fortunate in her antagonists.
Those in the media, especially, would stoke a mighty sympathy backlash on her behalf. That resentment would feed nicely into the candidate's role as a voice for the aggrieved: those regular citizens under the heel of the "elites"—that immense, tentacled power whose depredations she has been describing to audiences since her star turn on the McCain ticket.
She showed resilience and not a little backbone throughout, bouncing back after a hapless on-air encounter with CBS's Katie Couric. And after a daunting encounter with ABC's Charles Gibson—a civilized presence and one of the most genial of men ever to occupy a news anchor's chair—now turned into an oaf unable to conceal disdain as he questioned his guest on her capacities for office. That was, to be sure, a pale echo of other spectacles. CNN's Campbell Brown rocketed, nightly, to impressive levels of semi-hysteria on the subject of Mrs. Palin and her incapacities.
(Excerpt) Read more at online.wsj.com ...
Though it hasn't attracted wide attention, nothing Mrs. Palin has done recently has been worthier of notice than her endorsement of Rand Paul, now running in Kentucky's GOP senate primary. Dr. Paul, an opthamologist and radical libertarian, holds views on national security and defense that have much in common with those of the far left. Not to mention those of the considerable body of conspiracy theorists, antigovernment zealots, 9/11 truthers, and assorted other cadres of the obsessed and deranged who flocked to the presidential candidacy of his father Ron Paul, the congressman from Texas.
Another good point. Sarah Palin should stay clear of the Paulbots.
If Governor Palin NEVER runs for elected office again, she will still have to be considered a great, patriotic American. She has driven millions of commie ‘RATS over the edge into the abyss of insanity. LOL!
This is a wonderful hit piece. I like how the author hid the fact that it was a hit piece until the second half of the article.
Indeed. There were things that were so outrageous that she should have ignored. They needed no clarifying.
Sarah has tried to let a lot of insults pass and she has maintained good humor through it all, but she has to take the attacks head on sometimes.
I’m not so sure it’s a hit piece. Sarah isn’t perfect and I hope she reads this article as constructive criticism.
No matter what transpires in regard to Sarah Palin there is and always will be one constant: She being head and shoulders above Mitt Romney.
Private citizen Sarah Palin confront slanderous critics = bad
President George Bush ignores slanderous critics = bad
OK, got it.
They are both good individuals.
Make sure all those tray tables are closed and seats in their upright position...
Agreed. But I also have to say that Rabinowitz (whose work and judgments I generally agree with and respect), does not seem to grasp just how the grass roots in flyover country lives and functions. Rabinowitz might benefit from tilting her nose down just a notch. Dismissing the seething anger at the destruction of our future as mere “grievance politics” suggests that Rabinowitz might benefit from a council of policy wonk-advisers who could bring her up to speed on how life is lived in flyover country.
New Yorkers just don’t get out and around very much, I guess.
most of Sarah’s defense has being mainly about her children, she said that she didn’t care about the attacks on her personally, so it author is wrong about Sarah creating things
Like Charlie Gibson interview, it was people noticing that he was almost over the seat looking down at her with those glasses on, looking disapprovingly...she didn’t say anything in public nor in her book about him too negatively .....
That is *indeed* an excellent point, but also the only good one he makes in the entire article. I read the thing expecting some kind of Victor Davis Hanson type analysis. I didn’t get it.
“I’m not so sure it’s a hit piece.”
I’m sure Rabinowitz thought it was friendly amendment, kind counsel etc. She didn’t intend it to be a hit piece and it’s not merely a hit piece. It is, however, a tad snooty—unintentionally so. Elites can’t help it their elites.
Elites can’t help that they’re elites.
Dorothy Rabinowitz is an old, tiresome bore. And Palin, if she runs in 2012, will deliver a massively humiliating defeat to Myth Romney and all his hind-tit nursing lackeys. Including you karl rove.
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.
