JP, you argue well. Well enough to be a lawyer (and I mean that as a compliment), but you actually lost your legs on this one some time back. You're now trying to walk on thin air.
None of the people you mentioned is running for president in 2012, except for Sarah Palin and Barack Obama, both of whom have penned a couple of books, each. I asked you who among the current field of Republican candidates has written the type of scholarly tome you demand of Sarah Palin. So far, you've said much, but have failed to answer that question (Newt wrote on a different topic).
Where's Mitt's book on history? How 'bout Michele's? Herman Cain's? Why is Sarah Palin the only one who MUST produce a scholarly treatise on foreign affairs or history? Oh, that's right, it's because everyone else in the field has already proven that they're mental giants of impeccable pedigree, who possess a command of US foreign policy and history that would make Jefferson blush.
So tell me. How is it that Sarah embarrassed the entire left-wing establishment recently with her superior knowledge of the history of Paul Revere's famous ride? Not one American in a thousand was aware of that part of Revere's story, but Sarah was. And it made national news.
Yet, she still has to prove to you and those who have no intention of ever supporting her, that she meets your artificial and inflated standards.
I think you know where you can put those standards.
Sarah Palin is in a SMALL group of people who actually have a chance to be elected President. Cain, Paul, Santorum, NEVER had a chance in my view. I started out thinking Bachmann had no chance but I've changed my mind.
So that leaves, Pawlenty, Romney, Huntsman, Bachmann, and Palin. Perry? ah, I don't think so.
Pawlenty: Does anyone think he's too dumb to be President? No, his problem is he's either too dull or too timid to be President, right? Am I judging him by a different standard than Palin? You bet. No one thinks Palin is dull or timid.
Romney is too plastic, too formal, and may not be an authentic conservative. Am I judging him by a different standard? Yup. No one doubts Palin’s conservative credentials or think she's too stiff.
Again, see what I'm driving at here? Each candidate has weaknesses, Palin’s are different than Romney's or Palenty’s.
Sarah Palin doesn't need to win ME over, she needs about a 1/3 of the people who currently think she's a dolt who wouldn't know foreign policy from a cake recipe to change THEIR minds about her and what she's done so far hasn't moved that one inch in her direction.
Meanwhile, Bachmann did very well in the debate and hiring Rollins was a good move. She doing things to help her cause where I don't think Palin has. Yes, we know you love Sarah, but I assume she's had your vote for a long time, it's not YOU she needs to convince.
Next week I may change my mind, I don't have a candidate yet. ANYONE but Obama is my operating principle.