Noonan: Mischievous Media Wants to Make Palin Face of GOP

The people operating from ignorance are just listening to the lies. The people operating with malice are the ones telling the lies.

This, of course, is the crux of the issue for her going forward along with becoming more attuned to national issues. I'm not worried at all about the latter, but the former is a great concern. As much as I support her, I am just extremely worried about the extent to which these lies have taken hold in the segments of the electorate that she would have to win over to be elected president (not the conservative base which clearly believes in her). I'm also concerned about the continuing attacks from the MSM.

She has a lot to overcome but she has indicated she's willing to fight the fight, so who am I to say she's fighting impossible odds? She's overcome tough odds before in her career.

Leaders that have the ability to inspire are so rare in politics. I see that potential in her so I'm with her all the way. Great, great job on these previous posts clearly explaining who she is and where she stands.

She has a lot to overcome but she has indicated she's willing to fight the fight, so who am I to say she's fighting impossible odds? She's overcome tough odds before in her career. Leaders that have the ability to inspire are so rare in politics. I see that potential in her so I'm with her all the way. Great, great job on these previous posts clearly explaining who she is and where she stands.

It's truly terrible the way she was savaged by the MSM. Frankly, the whole situation reminded me of the scene in "Mr. Smith Goes to Washington" (which is one of Palin's favorites, btw) where Jeff Smith is sandbagged by a Washington press corps that takes advantage of his "awe-shucks" good-natured ignorance of the nasty way political journalism works.

Through the election I constantly wanted to scream from the top of my lungs, "Flip the ticket!!!!" Palin had much better instincts than McCain. She would have put on the foil and give Obama a slap shot back to south Chicago. McCain's instincts were to hand Barack a pillow and a blankie and put us all to sleep with tales of how he rescued America from $3 million earmarks for museum projectors. I wish we could have had Palin debate Obama. She would have hand him his a$$ in a sling and have done it with a smile. Heck, she made Biden cry in their debate; can you imagine what she would have done to Barry O? He would have been in a fetal position crying for Michelle.

Palin wanted to "take the gloves off" and play to win. McCain didn't. He wanted to lose graciously. I felt sorry for her being saddled with such a pathetic old fart. The left is trying to paint her as everything from Dan Quayle to Dick Nixon to George W. Bush in a skirt. All you've got to do is take a good look at her real record in Alaska to know that she's none of those things. She doesn't really resemble any politician -- though the one she most closely resembles in her style and outlook is Reagan. She's the quintessential happy warrior (check this out) -- and the McCain people wasted her by telling her to go low key.

And she single-handedly reignited the culture wars by simply showing up. She gave one of the best speech I've ever heard on abortion in years. I think these crazy leftists are out of their minds about her because they know she has the potential to really shake things up when it comes to life issues. They don't feel the need to drop an atom bomb on people like Huckabee and Romney because those guys aren't really a threat. It was always easy to disregard pro-life men ("when have they ever been confronted with an unwanted pregnancy?") and old pro-life women ("it's easy for that old lady to talk when she can't have kids"), but in Palin we have a woman of childbearing years who was actually confronted with the prospects of giving birth to a Down Syndrome baby and chose life, and then on top of it she stood by a pregnant teenage daughter who chose life. She lives her philosophy apologetically and she looks so happy doing it. That's what really drives them nuts -- she's always smiling. They hated that about Reagan too.

This will make you feel much, much better. (At least it makes me feel better.) Watch these clips. This was filmed back in January or February 2008 -- before she was McCain's VP pick and at a time when the media was still honest enough to admit that she's wonderful: Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, Part 4, Part 5, Part 6

By the way, here's a really interesting bio piece on her. This piece mentions the "Hoosiers" aspect of her high school basketball championship, and I found it funny that when news-witch Katie Couric asked her what her favorite movie is, she said:

Sarah Palin: I love those old sports movies, like Hoosiers, and Rudy -- those that show that the underdog can make it and it's all about tenacity and work ethic and determination, and just doing the right thing. So it would probably be one of those two old sports movies.
Couric: Do you have a favorite scene from either of them?
Palin: At the very end, the victories! Yeah! Rudy, where he gets to run out on the field and he gets to participate and make a difference. And then in Hoosiers, when they win.

Did you happen to notice that the theme from Rudy was the music they chose for Palin's introduction?

(BTW, when news-witch Couric asked Biden and Palin to name the worst thing that Dick Cheney did as vice president. Biden went on and on for God knows how long on how Cheney is evil incarnate. Palin's answer: "Worst thing? I guess that would have been the duck-hunting accident." LOL!!! I don't think that shows "stupidity" on her part -- I think it shows excellent political instincts. You don't want to slam a fellow Republican, and yet you don't want to say he did nothing wrong, so you deflect to something kinda humorous. She then went on to praise his commitment to the troops, which is something no one can fault him for.)

As for Palin's future, a lot can happen in four years. Don't underestimate the American public's ability to forget. All of Palin's opponents and friends have said that she has excellent political instincts. If she thinks she can win, she'll run. And if she were to run her own campaign, she'd be organized, on message, and she'd run to win. That's another thing everyone says about her -- she's extremely disciplined. History might just repeat itself again here. In 2002, a little known mayor ran for her lieutenant governor of her state and lost only to turn around four years to run for governor, beat the incumbent in the primaries, beat a well respected former governor in the general and win the race without the backing of her own party or any special interest. Literally, her own party wouldn't give her any financing in that race. She didn't have help from any of the Alaskan special interest constituents either -- the oil companies, the environmentalists, the native community. She ran on her own, and she won.

We're talking about a lady who has only lost three races in her life: the Miss Alaska pageant in 1984, the lieutenant governor race in 2002, and her vice presidential bid in 2008. In 1984, she won Miss Congeniality and earned enough scholarship money to pay for college. In 2006, she rebounded from her lieutenant governor loss to win the governorship. In 2008, she’ll survive this presidential race and go on to bigger and better things.

Reagan made two presidential runs before finally winning. There was a premature bid in 1968, and a long hard race in 1976, and after that one everyone thought he was surely finished once and for all. The nation went on to elect Carter, and conservatism and the GOP looked like they were done for good. Liberalism won, and a new era was about to be born.

Thomas Sowell talks about what Democrats thought about Reagan back in the day by citing Meg Greenfield in the Washington post:

It was the wisdom of the other contenders and of most Republican Party leaders, too, not to mention of practically everyone in Democratic politics, that Reagan was: too old, too extreme, too marginal and not nearly smart enough to win the nomination. The Democrats , in fact, when they weren’t chortling about him, were fervently hoping he would be the nominee. When he carried the convention in Detroit, people I knew in the Carter White House were ecstatic.

Yeah, right. Funny how history has a way of ripping the rug out under our foolish assumptions.

So let her critics feel free to underestimate the ‘Cuda. Her critics always do. And they’re always shocked when she comes back and wins.

Ooops. That should be "She lives her philosophy unapologetically."

You know, Gal, you are an inspiring writer. For some reason your piece evokes in me the memory of the men who stood their ground that day in Lexington in 1775. When the British officer in command of the Regulars ordered the American farmers and militia to lay down their arms and disperse, the American leader, Captain Parker, said to his little company of Patriots, "Stand fast. If they mean to have a war, let it begin here".

If the Palin bashers mean to have a war over her right to lead us into the battle for this country's future, let it begin here.

I believe you should have a role to play in the coming political war.

Lady, get thee to the campaign !

You're in a tiny minority on FR if you question the conservatism of Gov. Jindal, but here's some fairly good evidence of it.

I was part of a tiny minority on FR that said MccAin't would never win... Majority here is not a Conservative consensus. Far from it.

Palin is not a Conservative, at least not on her record and her statements. She seems to be a moderate with libertarian leanings, in the Thompson mold. Before lending her support, I would recommend a thorough debate on how she might rise to the normal argument for a Conservative candidate:

Explain to me (succinctly) how she will harness the three pillars of Conservatism- What are the qualifications that make her attractive to each, and how does she reflect an ability to unify them. Remember: Unlike here, Conservatives vote record- so no flowers and unicorns please... Give me facts. I am opposed to her as a candidate (and in a leadership role) on this basis, so I will rebut, but I am open to being convinced. It is my position that she is not a Reagan Conservative, and therefore cannot join the 3 pillars of the Reagan Coalition. As such, she should be rejected.

May I suggest you begin by reading the aforementioned posts by GipperGirl.

And how about defining for us your 3 Pillars of the Reagan coalition. It is always best to begin a discussion by defining your terms. Wouldn't you say?

For some reason your piece evokes in me the memory of the men who stood their ground that day in Lexington in 1775. When the British officer in command of the Regulars ordered the American farmers and militia to lay down their arms and disperse, the American leader, Captain Parker, said to his little company of Patriots, "Stand fast. If they mean to have a war, let it begin here".

If the Palin bashers mean to have a war over her right to lead us into the battle for this country's future, let it begin here.

And to that we say...

Seriously, there's something special about this lady that we should not overlook. She has political courage and integrity. That is a very rare commodity.

Look at her biography. After losing that lieutenant governor race by a narrow margin of 2% despite having been outspend 5 to 1, she was definitely on the radar of all the Republican power brokers in the state. Governor Murkowski offered her a choice of a position in his cabinet of Commerce commissioner, but she turned it down. If she just wanted money and the ability to hone her credentials for a future run as governor, this commissioner position would have been ideal -- with its travel junkets, glad-handing receptions, etc. Then Murkowski offered her the ethics chairmanship position on the state's oil and gas regulatory commission, and she took it because she wanted to really learn all there is to know about the oil and gas industry in Alaska. And boy did she learn. She learned pretty quickly that it was corrupt to the core. Murkowski and the others expected her to sit there, smile for the photo ops, and do nothing. They underestimated her. They thought she was a Caribou Barbie.

The Republican party chairman was also on the commission and he was supposed to report to her, but he had contempt for her (and anger that he wasn't given the chairmanship position instead of her). He was running party business on the government's dime, and was completely in the pocket of the energy companies he was supposed to be regulating on behalf of the public, whose interests he was supposed to protect. You can read about the whole sordid affair here.

She blew the whistle on the guy, but the state's attorney general and the governor himself were just as crooked. They didn't want to hear about it. So she did the only ethical thing she could do. She resigned her commission in protest and eventually went public. Keep in mind that by doing so she p*ssed off the most powerful and corrupt leaders in a corrupt state. She kissed goodbye any chance of advancement in the party when she turned on the party's most powerful leaders. She also turned her back on her first big six figure salary and was now without work or any hope of work again in the public sector. Her husband has a good blue collar job, but she made more money and I'm sure they were relying on that money with four kids (at that time). It took courage to do what she did.

When she turned around in 2006 to run for governor, no one thought she would even win the nomination. Everyone thought she would be lucky to win the lieutenant governor race the second time around. Well, she won the primary by a landslide. See the video of it here. She then went on to to run in the general election against a well respected former two term Democratic governor (and a snotty smarmy former state legislator who ran as an Independent). Her own party didn't support her. The GOP establishment was still being chaired by the crook she turned in. They hated her (many of them still do). They wouldn't give her a dime. She did everything through an amazing grassroots support effort, and through out of state funding by conservative PAC groups. The first thing she did after winning was call for the resignation of that GOP chairman.

It's not for nothing that they started referring to her as the Joan of Arc of Alaska. This lady is worth following into the battle. When Mark Levin declared on his radio show that “Sarah Palin is one of us” he was speaking the literal truth. She’s a conservative ditto head like many of us.

Take for example a letter to the editor she wrote to the Anchorage Daily News back in 1993:

Palin, then a Wasilla councilwoman]called the paper “dangerously biased” for its coverage of Sen. George Jacko, a key member of the Republican majority in Juneau. Jacko had been caught trying noisily to get into the room of a female legislative aide and was eventually censured by the Legislature.
“How can you justify your restraint in slamming the Clintons, Kennedys, Marion Barrys and other philandering, chauvinistic left-wingers of the world?” Palin wrote at the time. “Your yellow, liberal rag is so obvious. I pray we will someday have a choice in newspapers again.”

Or take this incident:

When federal judges in San Francisco ruled in 2002 that reciting the Pledge of Allegiance in public schools was unconstitutional because it included the phrase “under God,” Sarah Palin was not amused. Palin, who at the time was Mayor of Wasilla, Alaska, quickly drafted a terse letter to the editor of a San Francisco newspaper.
“Dear Editor,” Palin wrote in 2002. “San Francisco judges forbidding our Pledge of Allegiance? They will take the phrase ‘under God’ away from me when my cold, dead lips can no longer utter those words,” Palin wrote. “God Bless America,” she concluded.

Sounds just like the sort of thing any one of us would say. She is a conservative like us. That’s why we like her.

BTW, it would appear that she does in fact read newspapers seeing as how she is writing letters to them.

May I suggest you begin by reading the aforementioned posts by GipperGirl.

Sure, (No offense, GG) GipperGirl's magnificent posts lay out my argument quite well. Palin is a moderate, a populist, and a pragmatist. That is not a Conservative. Having just lost a race due to watery pragmatism, I would think we would not be so quick to jump right back into the very same thinking.

And how about defining for us your 3 Pillars of the Reagan coalition.

Certainly, though they are not "mine", by any means, and have been defined for 30 years now:

The Three Pillars of the Reagan Coalition:

SOCON -Social conservatives
FICON -Fiscal conservatives, Libertarians
DEFCON -Defense conservatives, Foreign Policy conservatives

These are the oft mentioned "three legs" of the Conservative stool. These three together make the big "C" Conservative base. One who supports all three of these is a Reagan Conservative, and is naturally appealing to them all. Without all three turning out in force, Republicans lose. It is a matter of simple math.

By the way, that I must explain Reagan Conservatism on this, the premiere Conservative site on the web, bodes ill.

As I noted in another post, Thomas Sowell wrote about what Democrats thought about Reagan back in 1980 by citing Meg Greenfield in the Washington post:

It was the wisdom of the other contenders and of most Republican Party leaders, too, not to mention of practically everyone in Democratic politics, that Reagan was: too old, too extreme, too marginal and not nearly smart enough to win the nomination. The Democrats, in fact, when they weren’t chortling about him, were fervently hoping he would be the nominee. When he carried the convention in Detroit, people I knew in the Carter White House were ecstatic.

Pardon me for not being impressed by Democrats crowing about how badly Palin would lose if she were nominated. They said the same thing about her when she ran for City Council, Mayor, and Governor. Just as they said the same about Reagan.

And sometimes Republicans even make this mistake. I remember how we all laughing at crazy Howard Dean's "50 State Plan" for the DNC. What a dopey idea to open offices in the deep South, right? Well, Howard got the last laugh. His 50 State Plan was a huge success and now Michael Steele wants to copy it for the GOP.

Here's my prediction for Palin's appearance in Georgia on Monday: she'll give a great speech and she'll close the deal for Saxby. The media will cover it because the camera loves to follow this woman. The MSM has a love/hate relationship with her. She's ratings gold. They can't get enough of her. And yet they loathe her at the same time. She has the star power to do pretty much anything she wants. We've never seen this sort of thing before. It frightens them and so they are dead set upon marginalizing any power she might have as a national candidate. But, again, I would not underestimate her.

As for Noonan, it might be instructive to recall that she didn't support Reagan in 1976. Make of that what you will...

I'm somewhat stunned that you would think that she's not socially conservative. What in God's name do you want her to do to prove it to you? Is socially conservative only defined by advocating creationism and abstinence only education? If that's the case, then I'm not socially conservative. And neither is most of our party because most of us don't have a problem with teaching science in science classes.

As for the fiscal conservatism thing...look, here's a smattering of headlines:

July 1st, 2007 - Massive line item vetoes (lopping almost a quarter-billion dollars off of a $1.8 billion capital budget).

Dec. 11th, 2007 - Palin’s proposed budget slashes earmark requests, and dramatically slows growth of government.

March 23rd, 2008 – More vetoes in the “supplemental budget”. Palin also demands that legislators explain their pork projects to her personally before she signs off on any of them. This issue was particularly hilarious because the budget was for “emergency spending” and it included (among other things) the construction of batting cages and gun ranges.

May 24th, 2008 – Second consecutive year of huge line-item vetoes in the state’s capital budget (over a quarter-billion dollars this time, 10% of the total capital budget).

“Republican primary voters in Alaska are ready for a change and are rallying to the fiscally responsible leadership embodied by Governor Palin.” - Pat Toomey, 9/24/2007

“Palin’s veto ax lops $268 million from budget” - Achorage Daily News Headline, 5/24/2008

“(Palin) has come out and told her own congressional delegation, all Republicans, ‘Stop with the earmarks! It’s wrong, it’s wrong! Even when it benefits us in Alaska.’” - Michael Medved, 12/21/2007

“Palin’s tough spending cuts drew criticism from Republican legislators whose pet projects were vetoed.” - Fred Barnes, 7/16/2007

“This week, it was Palin who single handedly killed the leading symbol of Republican spending excess in Washington: the Bridge to Nowhere.” - Patrick Ruffini, 9/29/2007

Palin’s record speaks for itself. She is a proven fiscal conservative. Take a look at this if you don’t believe me.

And if you still have a problem with her record than you really ought to listen to her explain it in detail in this interview where she was grilled about the specifics of her record and made to defend her fiscal conservative creds.

As for her not being a defense conservative, gimme a friggin' break! You're joking, right?

First of all,I apologize for the typo on GipperGal.

I don't have much time for a lengthy discussion right now ( it is 11pm in the east ) But I think the evidence presented by GipperGal and others during the campaign would dispute your contention that she is not a Reagan Conservative.

Taking your 3 pillars for a start, I think the evidence is overwhelming that she is

1. A social conservative based on her pro-life record, beliefs and actual life choices.And will clearly have the religious Right on her side.

2)She has also demonstrated fiscal restraint in both her actions as mayor and Governor and by her positions in the last campaign ( leaving aside her dutiful support of the bailout..which I blame entirely on her loyalty to McCain). And should be able to garner the fiscal conservatives and small government libertarians as well

and 3. She is a military hawk when it comes to challenges faced by this country overseas.The defense and fro a strong America types will find her mucho compatible

I don't think you can make the case for her being a moderate unless her position on the gay rights issue in state is by your definition moderate. Also IMO she is a populist in the same sense that RR was a populist in attracting the Reagan Democrats. And as far as governing as a pragmatist: well, RR was the epitome of pragmatism if by that word you mean governing to build coalitions to get things done. She is a governing pragmatist in the Reagan tradition of always moving the ball in the direction of the ultimate goal of conservative principles by getting everything she can........as opposed to the GWB form of pragmatism that takes as it's first principle the abandonment of conservative principles just to get something done. RR never did that and I believe neither has SR in Alaska.

Finally, I think it was informative to know what you where referring to when you used the word "coalition". That means political voting blocks rather than Philosophy. So I tried to address that aspect of your argument.

She is a governing pragmatist in the Reagan tradition of always moving the ball in the direction of the ultimate goal of conservative principles by getting everything she can...

I can give you a great example of how she governed like Reagan in one instance. One of my favorite Reagan stories is how he went right over the heads of Congress and the MSM to appeal directly to the people of American about the need to pass his economic plan. He gave a special address to the nation and asked people to wire and call their congressmen to tell them to get behind the Reagan plan. And the switchboards in D.C. were flooded! The response was unprecedented. Tip O'Neill was stunned and famously told Reagan, "you really beat us."

Byron York recounts this story about Palin:

And then there was the time earlier this year when she fought to cut Alaska’s business-licensing fee from $100 to $50 a year. (It had risen from $25 to $100 during the Murkowski administration.) Frustrated by the legislature’s inaction, Palin went to Alaska’s department of commerce and got the e-mail addresses of 23,000 business owners in the state. She then sent them a message, saying the $100 fee “has caused a hardship for those who are helping grow our economy, especially people who operate home-based and part-time businesses.” Legislators were angry — some accused Palin of inappropriate lobbying — but she won the day, and the fee was cut.

Classic Reagan manuever. Go over the greedy legislature and appeal directly to the people. Do you seriously doubt this woman's fiscal conservative creds?

BTW, one of the promises she made when she ran for mayor is that she would cut her own salary if elected because she fought the incumbent mayor when he got the rest of the City Council to raised his salary by $4,000. Once elected, she asked the City Council to vote to cut her salary by $4,000. And they did.

I'm somewhat stunned that you would think that she's not socially conservative. What in God's name do you want her to do to prove it to you?

Without supporting the mainstream Pro-Life position, which she does not, she will not bring home the Christian Right. Any other thing she may be to the Judeo-Christian community pales in comparison to this sole, non-negotiable issue. They have never compromised here, and they never will. There are other things, but this one is the non-starter.

As for the fiscal conservatism thing...look, here's a smattering of headlines:

Then please explain a 28% increase in the fiscal budget in AK this year. And while you're at it, her windfall profit tax (oops, I guess it's a fee) on oil companies in AK (which she and McDingbat railed ()bama for on the national scene, and her support of the bailout.

As for her not being a defense conservative, gimme a friggin' break! You're joking, right?

As for defense, it is her weakest suit. Her son being overseas is in her favor, but she has no real military experience. That is not insurmountable, but if faced with a military man in the primaries, she could well lose the DEFCONS in the very same way that they stuck so hard to MccAin't- Even though the rest of the Conservative world could not stand the man. Her foreign policy experience is legitimately stated to be abysmal.

Bear in mind, please, that I mean no offense- I rise to defend Reagan Conservatism, just as I always do. It is these kinds of problems in a candidate which cause schisms and eventual fractures. No conservative faction should be expected to compromise. That is the first rule that we should follow. Palin is all about compromise.

(((ping))) for comments if this challenge sees replies...

So they liked his applause lines like “let’s redistribute the wealth” better than hers?

Excellent examples. More stuff I didn't know including the little fact that Noonan didn't support RR in '76. Chickens finally coming home to foul another nest.

Shutting down Palin EastCoast operations for the night. You had a good run!

Carry on.

Without supporting the mainstream Pro-Life position, which she does not, she will not bring home the Christian Right. Any other thing she may be to the Judeo-Christian community pales in comparison to this sole, non-negotiable issue. They have never compromised here, and they never will. There are other things, but this one is the non-starter.

Okay, this is my first indication that you're out of your f***ing mind! HOW DOES SHE NOT GET THE PRO-LIFE VOTE?!!! She has the strongest and most solid pro-life credentials of any national politician we have ever seen!!!! She doesn't support abortion at all period. As I noted in an earlier post, she is against abortion even in the case of rape and incest. She is against stem cell research. She is against assisted suicide. She is as 100% Pro-Life. To deny this is a clear indication that you are delusional. She has lived her pro-life values more so than any politician we have ever seen. Your words are not only false, they are offensive!

I already answered you on fiscal conservative questions and told you to listen to her discuss her record herself. She actually cut spending and reined in the growth of government. That is a fact.

Even her critics can't tar her fiscal record. I read this in an article supposedly showing Palin’s “spotty record” on fiscal conservatism:

Until a few years ago, the state government struggled financially for years because of low oil prices. But that’s all changed. In the first two budget years under Palin, the state government has stashed almost $6 billion of surplus revenues in various reserve and savings accounts in anticipation of future drops in the price of oil. And the state has allocated another $4 billion over two years for a laundry list of new capital projects, mostly small grants initiated in budget requests by legislators for their districts.

Please explain how saving for the future is not fiscally conservative? She did use some of the surplus to:

...to reduce the state’s unfunded pension liability, increase education funding, establish a revenue-sharing fund for local governments [GG note: Palin's revenue-sharing is one of the best fiscal conservative efforts I've ever seen -- actually returning revenue to local government closest to the people to allow them to use it most effectively instead of distant bureaucrats doling it out in a one size fits all manner], and help residents with home weatherization and energy costs. Alaska has also suspended for a year its 8-cent-a-gallon tax on gasoline...
“There’s huge pressure to do all these things because we have this revenue,” said Karen J. Rehfeld, director of the governor’s Office of Management and Budget. “But the governor is still trying to stick to her goals; she still wants to slow the growth of government and be efficient... She’s been very consistent about that.”
A challenge, Rehfeld said, is to balance spending controls against “providing some of the significant infrastructure needed for this state. We’re still a young state and a lot of work needs to be done.”

There’s a reason why Alaska is not included in those think tank studies of which governor is more fiscally conservative. They always exclude Alaska because the state’s financial set up is so different from the rest of the states. They’re like an Arctic oil fiefdom up there. It’s difficult to make correlations between what Palin did up there and what we have on a federal level. But from what we can tell, she made prudent even-handed decisions considering that the state was scaling back on its federal pork requests, was still in need of the sort of infrastructure and other funding requirements expected of a young state, and was also experiencing record oil revenue profits with the expectation that these finite oil resources are rapidly depleting and the state must get the best price for its treasure while the treasure is still there.

(BTW, Palin is opposed to additional bailouts, and didn't really like the first one.)

Your argument about Defense Conservatism is utter nonsense. Do you realize that Reagan never saw combat? He spent World War II making training movies in Hollywood! Do you realize that Margaret Thatcher never wore a uniform? Or are you just a misogynist and think that women can't be strong commanders in chief? In that case, as Sarah would say, "let's just escort this Neanderthal back to the cave."

1. A social conservative based on her pro-life record, beliefs and actual life choices.And will clearly have the religious Right on her side.

I am a Reagan Conservative with SoCon beginnings and deep SoCon, and Pro-Life roots. There is a resentment of her official Pro-Life position among my contemporaries. She will not be supported by those I know.

2)She has also demonstrated fiscal restraint in both her actions as mayor and Governor

I will ask you the same questions I asked GipperGal:
How do you explain a 28% increase in the AK budget this year? How do you explain her windfall profit tax (oops, again: fee) on oil companies? How do you explain her support of the bailout? And I will lso add, How come Wasilla pays more in taxes after Palin than before?

and 3. She is a military hawk when it comes to challenges faced by this country overseas.The defense and fro a strong America types will find her mucho compatible

That is yet to be proven. She talks the talk, admittedly, but there is really no way to tell what she will do in a crisis. Compare her, if you will, to what I would consider a standard for the Reagan template, Duncan Hunter... Or if you'd like, Alan Keyes, or Tom Tancredo, or any number of others of that caliber if you'd like to pick another.

Hunter's leadership is unquestionable, especially militarily. If this country is faced with crisis, I can think of no other man that I would rather have at the helm, and Palin, by comparison, is mere fluff. There simply is no comparison.

Even against Keyes- The level of conviction in the man is unfathomable, and in every category. What Keyes will do is not a matter of debate- He is as predictable as the rising of the sun. Palin misses by an order of magnitude when compared to these two gentlemen. It is the difference between a populist and a statesman, I might add.

I don't think you can make the case for her being a moderate unless her position on the gay rights issue in state is by your definition moderate.

No, that would be liberal.

Also IMO she is a populist in the same sense that RR was a populist in attracting the Reagan Democrats.

Except that the Reagan Democrats are no longer Democrats- You know them as the Christian Right, the SoCons.

And as far as governing as a pragmatist: well, RR was the epitome of pragmatism if by that word you mean governing to build coalitions to get things done.

Reagan built a single coalition. The most powerful coalition the US has ever seen, and ever since, all the Republicans seem to want to do is tear it back apart.

Finally, I think it was informative to know what you where referring to when you used the word "coalition". That means political voting blocks rather than Philosophy.

Thanks for that, but it really is both. To a Reaganite, it is a way of life- to embrace and support all facets of Conservatism, just as much as the individual pillars see their particular discipline as a way of life as well.

Thanks for your reply.

Okay, this is my first indication that you're out of your f***ing mind! HOW DOES SHE NOT GET THE PRO-LIFE VOTE?!!! [...] Your words are not only false, they are offensive!

This is *not* the Pro-Life standard:

Constitution does offer an inherent right to privacy
Q: Do you think there's an inherent right to privacy in the Constitution?
A: I do. Yeah, I do.
Q: The cornerstone of Roe v. Wade.
A: I do. And I believe that individual states can best handle what the people within the different constituencies in the 50 states would like to see their will ushered in an issue like that.
Source: 2008 CBS News presidential interview with Katie Couric Oct 1, 2008
Abortion should be states' issue, not federal mandate
Q: Why is Roe v. Wade a bad decision?
A: I think it should be a states' issue not a federal government-mandated, mandating yes or no on such an important issue. I'm, in that sense, a federalist, where I believe that states should have more say in the laws of their lands and individual areas. Now, foundationally, it's no secret that I'm pro-life that I believe in a culture of life is very important for this country. Personally that's what I would like to see further embraced by America.
Source: 2008 CBS News presidential interview with Katie Couric Oct 1, 2008
OnTheIssues.org: Sarah Palin on Abortion

Can you tell me what the real Pro-Life position is?

I already answered you on fiscal conservative questions and told you to listen to her discuss her record herself.

So you are O.K with a 28% increase in the state budget in one year. That is fiscal conservatism to you, huh? And that it comes from an exorbitant windfall profit tax- Something that any Conservative of any stripe has been *dead_set_against* for as long as I have been alive... That doesn't bother you in the least, eh? Does it bother you that it was made retroactive, or is that O.K too?

I wonder what will happen next summer when the margins go up and the oil companies shut down their operations on state lands and ramp up their operations on federal lands... I wonder how the AK budget will be effected by that (because that is precisely what they are going to do). I wonder what she paid in good will for that one-time big money grab...

Please explain how saving for the future is not fiscally conservative?

Please explain how a 28% increase is fiscally conservative, and how corporate windfall profit taxes are conservative in any way, and we can go forward from there. The unmitigated hypocrisy it takes to sweep these two glaring errors under the rug, especially when campaigning nationally against them both, it just boggles the mind. It is indefensible, and to the FICONS (not to mention libertarians), I guarantee, it will be a very tough pill to swallow.

[...] finite oil resources are rapidly depleting and the state must get the best price for its treasure while the treasure is still there.

Poppycock. They are sitting on more oil than Saudi Arabia. Look up Seal Island some time. And that is just one of many. Their north shore is huge in oil reserves as well.

(BTW, Palin is opposed to additional bailouts, and didn't really like the first one.)

Will the real Sarah Palin please stand up? Which one is it?

Your argument about Defense Conservatism is utter nonsense.

Do you mean to tell me that... lets say Gen Petraeus ran for President... Do you really think the DEFCONS would flock to Palin over him in the primaries? Not for all the lipstick in the world. Not a chance in hell. She cannot offer them what he can. That is not to talk her down, it is just a bare fact. They respect their own.

What that means, though, is that Palin would not win, and neither would Petraeus- Conservatives split and spoiled, and a RINO cruises into the winner's circle. That is the inherent danger that I seek to prevent.