Sarah Palin, Forbesian

Nation Review ^ | Sunday June 13, 2010 | Jane Nordlinger

[Bigtigermike]

A few days ago, I did a post in which I linked to an article about Sarah Palin. The article was published shortly after Palin was nominated for vice president. My purpose in citing the article was to say something about Palin and Israel. But I noticed something else in the article that I thought I’d bring up here.

In the 2000 presidential cycle, Palin was mayor of Wasilla. And she was formally with . . . whose campaign? Steve Forbes’s. I think that most people think of Palin as a “social conservative,” as indeed she is. But she’s also a raging free-marketeer — in fact, one of the most robust, full-hearted, and full-throated proponents of a free market in American politics today.

Funny that she’s so seldom described this way. Many of the “cool” Republicans disdain her. You know the type of Republican I mean: the type that wants the party to drop abortion and other icky, discomforting issues. But, if entrepreneurial capitalism’s your thing, Palin is your woman, or at least someone to appreciate. She ought to have the appreciation of the entrepreneurially minded everywhere. It’s just that some people can never forgive her for not aborting a Down-syndrome child. Believe me, I know such people (I’m sorry to say).

[CondoleezzaProtege]

I don't think it's the "substance" of Sarah you should be worried about. It's her style. She's a LOT smarter and a LOT more knowledgable than she appears.

She was perfectly qualified in 2008, not just for the Vice Presidency but for the Presidency as well. Unlike Obama however, she was busy running a state. You know? Like actually accomplishing things. Being a LEADER. Doing things like holding Big Oil accountable, discussing trade with Canada, instituting ethics reform, and figuring out how the state was going to handle the Darfur/Sudan divestment. (I can't believe power-hungry insiders got away with the lie that Palin didn't know Africa was a continent *rolleyes.*)

So yes, Palin was busy LEADING, not rehearsing for a campaign and learning how to kiss up to the cameras.

That, plus being a beautiful, pro-life woman in the media world of envy-ridden liberals only adds to what she has against her. NOW that she understands this, she's able to be prepped and act accordingly.

In the case of the Katie Couric interview, her annoyance from the intuitive condescension she sensed from Katie definitely affected how she responded. Plus it was clearly edited and produced to show Palin unfavorably. I'm not going to excuse it. It was a bad interview, but honestly it was the Tina Fey impersonations that ultimately affected people's perceptions, the actual interview itself wasn't as bad as people make it out to be. Obama and Biden and McCain all had worse moments and gaffes.

So yes, your points are valid, don't get me wrong--but I encourage you to look beyond the surface and acutally measure her by her record and how she's actually LED. I read another post of yours in another thread and think you overestimate legislatures such as Eric Cantor and Paul Ryan. They may be good at writing Phd dissertations on the Constitution and voting "Yea" or "Nay" on the floor of the House--but they do not bring the executive qualifications, resume, and gravitas Palin has.

I heard Cantor has a coach to improve his poor public speaking qualities...He is NOT ready to go head to head with someone like Obama.

[Christian_Capitalist]

"In the 2000 presidential cycle, Palin was mayor of Wasilla. And she was formally with . . . whose campaign? Steve Forbes’s. I think that most people think of Palin as a “social conservative,” as indeed she is. But she’s also a raging free-marketeer — in fact, one of the most robust, full-hearted, and full-throated proponents of a free market in American politics today."

Great post. Palin and Forbes will hopefully do some good work together in the future.

[CondoleezzaProtege]

I don't think it's the "substance" of Sarah you should be worried about. It's her style.

THAT being said, while I understand Palin's "style" might give people the impression that she knows a lot less than she really does, I do believe her way with words, her pointed language, and her boldness will be an asset to her up against OBAMA specifically. Obama's tactic in '08 was to blur every issue with indulgent nuance so he won't have to take a strong stance and try to appeal to everyone...that won't work anymore. The Presidential debate in 2012 will be about the basics. The core differences in principle which divide us. It won't just be about the intricacies of policy. (Though Palin can most certainly handle the latter as wel.)

Palin's greatest strength is putting everything in clear terms. Summing up principles. Clarifying the "big picture" of what's at stake. I would want her to be the nominee if only to just have her be the one to debate Professor Obama.