Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Sarah for President? (There is no one more qualified for the White House. But is she electable?)
Pajamas Media ^ | 12/30/2010 | David Solway

Posted on 12/30/2010 10:22:38 AM PST by SeekAndFind

Sarah Palin continues to galvanize the imagination of both her ardent supporters and her hectoring adversaries. It is easy to understand her appeal to those who have rallied behind her and her possible candidacy for the office of president of the United States. She has a lot going for her: charm, personableness, natural smarts, moral probity, executive competence, independence of character, and a passionate love of country. These are undeniable advantages, or should be in any sane political environment.

At the same time, she steps up to the plate with two strikes against her — or, in an alternative baseball universe, with three, four, or five strikes already logged in the umpire’s clicker. PDS (Palin Derangement Syndrome) flourishes on the liberal-left, to the extent that a correspondent to Salon.com suggests “we get rid of Palin” by having her electrocuted like one of Michael Vick’s dogs. According to the media scuttlebutt and her innumerable liberal detractors, she is poorly educated, brings no foreign policy experience to the job, shoots her own dinner, comes across as politically unnuanced, and, perhaps the most cutting strike against her, lacks gravitas. These negatives are obviously serious disadvantages for anyone contemplating a run for the presidency, but are they valid criticisms? Is she really “out” before she even takes a swing? Let’s consider each of these knocks against her in turn.

To begin with, Palin is by no means poorly educated; she merely did not graduate with a degree from an Ivy League institution, which by any reasonable account in today’s academic milieu should stand decidedly in her favor. Harvard, Princeton, Yale, Columbia, Berkeley and other so-called elite universities charge prohibitive tuition fees while, for the most part, delivering second-rate curricular fare. They represent the kiss of intellectual death — unless, of course, one wishes to enter the service of the State Department or practice trial or immigration law. Palin did well to avoid these bastions of mainly liberal-left political correctness.

As for the absence of foreign policy experience, David Jenkins reminds us in an article for PJM that, with the exception of the elder Bush (who, incidentally, was no presidential cynosure), “it is not common for presidents to enter office with foreign policy experience.” In this respect, Palin is no different from the vast majority of her predecessors and certainly not from the present incumbent. What is needed in this domain is precisely what Palin would bring to the highest office in the land: insight and principle. As Jenkins writes, “she knows that America must be strong in order to be safe, and…that we must develop our own resources and end our dependence on foreign oil.” Palin also knows that an American president does not bow and apologize to foreign despots and does not alienate loyal and tested allies, but comports himself or herself with dignity and courage.

Nor is there anything wrong with shooting one’s own dinner, especially when one considers that liberal urbanites are perfectly OK with having other people shoot their dinner for them. Unless they are dedicated vegans, their hypocrisy is indigestible, and even vegans would surely vote for a meat-eating Democrat. Being handy with a shotgun and knowing how to skin a caribou is plainly not the real issue here. The implication is that Palin is some sort of primitive rustic rather than a credentialed cosmopolite. But the truth is that frowning on Palin’s wilderness skills is nothing but class snobbery on the part of those who would be utterly lost were they stripped of the “civilized” amenities they thoughtlessly take for granted. It is their mincing pretentiousness and fashionable outrage, not Palin’s honest hardiness, that is deplorable.

Further, Palin is by no means politically unnuanced. Quite the contrary, she is as politically savvy as they come, whether on the domestic or international front. Her speeches during the recent congressional elections were not only unteleprompted barnburners in the best populist tradition, but revealed a meticulous command of the domestic issues currently bedeviling the nation as well as a finely nuanced understanding of America’s pancreatic failures in international diplomacy. She displays a far more realistic perspective on the Middle East and has far more accurately taken the measure of America’s geopolitical competitors, particularly Russia and China, than anyone in the Democratic administration.

Palin does not believe in tax and spend, in fiat printing, in redistributive economics, in ObamaCare, in the AGW nonsense that is only an opaque wealth transfer scheme, in making purses out of sows’ ears (aka pork and earmarks), in pressing reset buttons, in blaming Israel for the Palestinians, or in a degrading and unproductive “outreach” to the Islamic umma. These are policies she would reverse, as indeed would anyone with a nuanced understanding of the economic and political worlds. There is little doubt that Palin would be a strong, resolute, and effective president should she ever accede to the White House. Unlike Obama, she would not try to square the Oval.

Finally, if Palin lacks gravitas, then so do many others on the current political scene. Barack Obama, for example, not only lacks gravitas, he exhibits the moral and intellectual substance of a will o’ the wisp. This is not to take anything away from his golf game, but in political life he is always badly in need of a mulligan. Joe Biden is a figure straight out of vaudeville who can be dependably counted on to drop the cane he is trying to twirl — though, it must be admitted, he would look great in a straw boater. Hillary Clinton is, frankly, a wizened party hack and, like her husband, an adroit shape-shifter: one cannot trust a word she utters. No gravitas to be found amidst this crew.

Among the possible Republican contenders there are (or were) some potentially credible choices, at least from the standpoint of knowledge, experience, and/or presence. Newt Gingrich carries weight and political erudition but unfortunately also carries baggage. The same may be said for Jeb Bush, whose family name still remains a heavy burden he may not be able to shuck. His opposition to Arizona’s immigration law is also a very bad sign. Others like Marco Rubio and Allen West, both highly impressive figures, are too young or new to the field to be presidentially assessed. Chris Christie is a bold and ethical administrator, but is not a particularly persuasive communicator. John Thune is little known and Mitch Daniels is aura-challenged. Mike Huckabee’s banjo is not an electoral plus. Bobby Jindal and Tim Pawlenty are “good people,” but Jindal does not seem ready for higher office and Pawlenty is prone to misjudgment, such as withdrawing from the race for a third term as Minnesota governor that he could have won handily. Mississippi Governor Haley Barbour may have disqualified himself from consideration owing to certain insensitive or ambiguous racial comments — at least, journalist and fellow-Southerner Kyle-Anne Shiver appears to think so. John Bolton would make a decent president but an even better secretary of defense. Rick Perry’s secession remark, however flippant, has cost him dearly. Mitt Romney seems to wear a certain gravitas, but the “RomneyCare” fiasco that he imposed as governor of Massachusetts shows his weak and fallible side.

The real problem, however, is that “gravitas” is a vague and unreliable personality construct and, moreover, one that can be readily simulated by a good actor. Al Gore, for instance, managed to project seriousness of purpose for a time, until greed, corruption, and deceit tore away the mask with which he dazzled his public. “Gravitas” functions primarily as a media buzzword that can be applied indiscriminately, either to demean or to inflate its chosen subject. Only in the most proven and ineluctable cases can it be said to be an appropriate descriptor, and these are far and few between. Whether or not Palin is deficient in this regard, what she demonstrably lacks is the approval of a reprobate and partisan press, which is itself cripplingly short of integrity, not to mention gravitas.

But is Palin electable? The next two years will determine whether she will be able to counter the slanderous media campaign against her candidacy and her competence, and so convince enough people that she has the right stuff to lead the country in perhaps its most perilous historical moment since the Civil War. Clearly, she suffers more than her share of antagonists among the megabuck left and their myriad satellites, Ivy League academics, mainstream journalists, public intellectuals, union impresarios and henchmen, and the entitlement-addicted segment of the public. They are terrified of her. She even has the panjandrums in the Republican old guard shaking in their Guccis.

As Victor Volsky writes in American Thinker, “in the eyes of the political/cultural aristocracy, [Palin] is the embodiment of its worst nightmare: the revolt of the masses against their masters.” And she knows that the master class will mobilize its considerable reserves against her. The question is whether, by sheer force of character, will, and charisma, like an American version of Delacroix’s Marianne leading the charge at the electoral barricades, and by pursuing a tireless itinerary, she can prevail against overwhelming odds and bring to the American people authentic change and genuine hope for the future.

-- David Solway is a Canadian poet and essayist. He is the author of The Big Lie: On Terror, Antisemitism, and Identity, and is currently working on a sequel, Living in the Valley of Shmoon. His new book on Jewish and Israeli themes, Hear, O Israel!, has just been released by Mantua Books.


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Government; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: 2012primaries; elections; freepressforpalin; obama; palin; president; sarahpalin
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 101-120121-140141-160 ... 181-184 next last
To: onyx

They are doing that because polls are showing that Palin can’t even win in Alaska.


121 posted on 12/30/2010 2:14:13 PM PST by Minus_The_Bear
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 120 | View Replies]

To: onyx

That seems to be the latest meme -—> God wants male leaders so Sarah supporters must be going against God’s will, therefore Sarah supporters are Godless.

Huck’sabusybee...

“God uses the good ones, and the bad ones use God.”
Jimmy Stewart in Fool’s Parade


122 posted on 12/30/2010 2:17:17 PM PST by b9 (Palindrome ~ HARASSARAH at your own peril)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 116 | View Replies]

To: Minus_The_Bear
...Obama will destroy her.

That's right, the Marxist is a superman and the common sense Palin is the inferior one.

It must be really tough to get up in the morning with such a view of things.

123 posted on 12/30/2010 2:21:38 PM PST by FreeReign
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 119 | View Replies]

To: Minus_The_Bear
Yep, I sure believe those polls two years out.

As I recall, so did Jimmy Carter as he licked his chops at the thought of running against Ronald Reagan.........

124 posted on 12/30/2010 2:25:21 PM PST by Lakeshark (Thank a member of the US armed forces for their sacrifice)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 121 | View Replies]

To: Minus_The_Bear

Oh yeah, and McCain is the only republican who could have beaten Hillary, you got that poll too, right?


125 posted on 12/30/2010 2:26:15 PM PST by Lakeshark (Thank a member of the US armed forces for their sacrifice)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 121 | View Replies]

To: Minus_The_Bear

ROTFLOLOL. By your lamestream polling numbers, all she has to do is win over 11% to win and the election is 2 years out!

Your *concerns* are not mine.


126 posted on 12/30/2010 2:27:37 PM PST by onyx (If you truly support Sarah Palin and want on her busy ping list, let me know!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 121 | View Replies]

To: Lakeshark
Sigh... try pulling your head out.


127 posted on 12/30/2010 2:28:43 PM PST by Minus_The_Bear
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 125 | View Replies]

To: FreeReign
You saying it couldn't happen? You saying I said it WILL happen? You asking me to defend something I didn't say?

For the third time now, what makes a person qualified to be president, when they have been "a complete unknown", for the last two years, while our country is being destroyed?

Qualifications to be President

But back to David Solway's original claim, I suppose Sarah is the most natural born Citizen, etc.

128 posted on 12/30/2010 2:28:53 PM PST by BufordP ("Drink me if you can't take a joke." -- Kool-aid)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 117 | View Replies]

To: Conservativegreatgrandma

The establishment managed to get McCain nominated.


129 posted on 12/30/2010 2:28:53 PM PST by Coldwater Creek (He who dwells in the shelter of the Most High will rest in the shadow of the Almighty Psalm 91:)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 115 | View Replies]

To: b9
LOL. The misogynist angle was sure to arise....

Let's see the tough guys step forward.

130 posted on 12/30/2010 2:30:31 PM PST by onyx (If you truly support Sarah Palin and want on her busy ping list, let me know!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 122 | View Replies]

To: Coldwater Creek
Uhhh no, Democrat voters nominated McCain. It's called open primaries.


131 posted on 12/30/2010 2:32:27 PM PST by Minus_The_Bear
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 129 | View Replies]

To: Minus_The_Bear
You get all hot and bothered about polls before the campaign has begun and you are suggesting I'm the one who needs to pull my head out?

I actually know people who voted for McCain and told me it's because of the poll that showed he was the only candidate that could beat Hillary, I think that poll was 9 months before the election.

Pardon me while I go laugh at your silliness.......

132 posted on 12/30/2010 2:32:44 PM PST by Lakeshark (Thank a member of the US armed forces for their sacrifice)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 127 | View Replies]

To: Minus_The_Bear
Here ya go *concern* troll....LOL.

Historic Whispers: Ronald Reagan Had Little Chance of Winning the Primary

White House political strategists have concluded—regretfully—that Ronald Reagan is fading and will have little chance of winning the Republican presidential nomination in 1980. Why the regrets? Because Carter's aides are convinced that the conservative, 68-year-old former California governor is an easy target. (April 2, 1979)
Here's another blast from the past, March 10, 1980. The GOP establishment had decided they needed another candidate besides Bush to stop Reagan and started recruiting Gerald Ford:

ABC News - Harris poll: FORD LEADS BOTH CARTER AND REAGAN, ALTHOUGH STILL UNDECLARED CANDIDATE

"Former President Gerald Ford is the first choice of Republican and independent voters to head the GOP ticket, even though he has not yet declared himself a candidate for the Republican nomination.

Ford also leads President Carter among the general electorate."
Harris Poll January 29, 1980:

CARTER NOW FAR AHEAD OF BOTH REAGAN AND BUSH

"President Carter so dominates the American political scene now that his margin over Ronald Reagan in a post-Iowa trial heat has risen to an overwhelming 65-31 percent."

Also, Time magazine ran a big story in March of that year basically saying Reagan was unelectable. Gallup had a poll in that time frame with Reagan down 25 points.

133 posted on 12/30/2010 2:33:04 PM PST by onyx (If you truly support Sarah Palin and want on her busy ping list, let me know!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 127 | View Replies]

To: Minus_The_Bear

To: GoCards; Syncro; Sheila Robinson; All

This was at the Tea Party Express rally in Reno, NV last week (Go Sharron Angle!). The lady in the cowboy hat with the sweet smile is my wife Sheila. And that’s Syncro’s left eyeball in the upper left as he focuses his video camera.

Sarah was introduced to me by Sal Russo (leader of the Tea Party Express) who introduced me as Jim Robinson from freerepublic.com. She said thank you for all you guys have done, then leaned forward and gave me a little cheek to cheek hug. I took it as she loves the FReepers and pass it on to all of you!!

Woo hoo!! FR is Palin Country!!


48 posted on 10/26/2010 12:12:51 PM PDT by Jim Robinson (Rebellion is brewing!! Just vote them OUT!!)


134 posted on 12/30/2010 2:35:18 PM PST by onyx (If you truly support Sarah Palin and want on her busy ping list, let me know!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 131 | View Replies]

To: RoadTest

Another outspoken outsider who naively believes she can effectively change nearly intractable policies and procedures. Good luck with that. Once learned, independent voters will not be twice burned. The 40% in the middle, many of whom respect and like Palin, will not see her as presidential material. Period.


135 posted on 12/30/2010 2:36:39 PM PST by erlayman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 103 | View Replies]

To: onyx

Oh, they won’t step forward. It’s always something they “heard” by “someone else,” it’s never their own opinion.

Concern trolls. Even misogynist females.

Meanwhile, Huckabee’s licking his smarmy chops...


136 posted on 12/30/2010 2:39:47 PM PST by b9 (Palindrome ~ HARASSARAH at your own peril)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 130 | View Replies]

To: sauropod
Second time today I’ve seen the term “concern troll.”

They look like this...

Photobucket And you can find out a lot about them this way:

Click Here

137 posted on 12/30/2010 2:40:40 PM PST by lonevoice (Where the Welfare State is on the march, the Police State is not far behind)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: onyx
You realize that none of that has anything to do with Palin.

Palin is not Reagan.
138 posted on 12/30/2010 2:41:49 PM PST by Minus_The_Bear
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 133 | View Replies]

To: Vaquero
She's not qualified to be POTUS because she has never been POTUS.

You just know this argument will be made for Zero.

139 posted on 12/30/2010 2:45:36 PM PST by MaxMax
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Minus_The_Bear
Palin is not Reagan.

**************************

What?! Is this a joke?

140 posted on 12/30/2010 2:47:35 PM PST by trisham (Zen is not easy. It takes effort to attain nothingness. And then what do you have? Bupkis.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 138 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 101-120121-140141-160 ... 181-184 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson