If you strike her down, she will come back stronger than you can believe…
I really do not know what she plans. She may go on to be a Housewife or she may go on to be President. She may land somewhere between.
What I do know is that for some reason the Left is terribly afraid of her and she causes their heads to explode.
She also scares many Republicans and almost all talking heads on the news.
That makes me smile.
The Left has become so reactionary that they go after anyone who dares challenger their divinely-ordained and absolute rule, no matter how small or otherwise insignificant. Just ask Ricci.
Can’t speak for “the left” but this center-left individual isn’t afraid of her. I just think she’s ignorant.
Please note – ignorance is “a lack of knowledge” and can be fixed. I see no indication that she has the stamina or the desire to do so.
See that radical leftist Peggy Noonan’s article for an elaboration of my views.
It’s been years since I cared what Peggy Noonan thought about…much of anything.
I can guess why you wrongly think she’s ignorant Chris. If you think Charles Gibson proved her to be ignorant you’d be wrong. He was the moron and her answers to him were absolutely precisely correct. If you think Katie Couric made her look ignorant, you’d be right; the same way editing can make anyone thoughtful (and suspicious of exactly what resulted) be made to look ignorant.
Was she ignorant of international issues? Not the one’s she had to deal with as governor. You and I would be the ignorant ones if that were the standard.
Everybody is ignorant. Being so stupid as to accuse someone as intelligent and successful as Sarah Palin of being ignorant only exposes that you’ve been duped by a dangerous media intent on keeping you ignorant.
Oh, and you’d be magnificently ignorant if you called her a quitter.
Ken Anthony – So Kathie Couric edited out the smart response to “what newspapers do you read” and left in “all of them?” (Actually, I saw the interview – it was less coherent then that.)
I did not run for Vice President. I expect the person who runs for Vice President to know more about foreign policy then I do. That’s part of the job description.
The definition of the word “quitter” is “one who quits.” She quit her job as governor of Alaska. She is by definition a quitter.
So instead of the “not-smarter-than-Chris-Gerrib” Sarah Palin as vice-president, we got the “smarter-than-Chris-Gerrib” Joseph Biden.
For some reason I’m reminded of a bit of Escherian logic my dad sprang on me when I was a kid:
Creamed spinach is better than nothing.
Nothing is better than ice cream.
Ergo, creamed spinach is better than ice cream.
For the record, the attempt to baffle me failed because I rejected the first premise. I think I’ll reject Chris’ premise as well.
So instead of the “not-smarter-than-Chris-Gerrib” Sarah Palin as vice-president, we got the “smarter-than-Chris-Gerrib” Joseph Biden.
That was a low blow, but well deserved.
The problem with that “logic” is the marvelous ambiguity from human language. Which is why you should use a non-ambiguous way of expressing such constructs when doing logic reasoning.
I’m wondering whether the House passage of the cap and trade bill was what prompted Palin’s resignation, combined with the fact that Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R, Alaska), sponsored a cap-and-trade bill a couple years ago, and might possibly support the new one when it comes up in the Senate, even though Alaska is an oil-producing state. Palin may know whether Murkowski plans to support it. Murkowski will come up for election next year.
Maybe Palin wants to be free of the governorship so she can concentrate on running against Murkowski in the Republican primary? Or maybe she wants Murkowski to be afraid that she might, to encourage her to vote against cap-and-trade?
I saw the interview – it was less coherent then that
No you didn’t Chris. You saw an edited version designed to make her look stupid and you bought it.
Why did Kathie Couric ask (and persist in asking) “what newspapers do you read”. What was her motivation? I’ve read that at that point Sarah’s guard was up because she was suspicious of the question.
How do you know that Sarah’s answer, “all of them?” was not in response to a list they previously discussed? You don’t.
This is how you decide that somebody is ignorant??? Pick a few isolated incidents and get out your broad brush??? It makes you look pretty ignorant. Answer ten question and you could be a millionaire. Or is every body so damned ignorant. Politicians can’t afford the easy answer, “I’ll have to look into that” too often; instead they do what Biden does, make stuff up and present it as fact. If the media chooses only to correct one party, who’s the ignorant party?
I expect the person who runs for Vice President to know more about foreign policy then I do.
Her job was Governor. To this point in her life, international affairs may not have been much interest to her. I imagine she will make up for that now. Even with any mistakes she may have made, she still knows more than Biden if you bother to check the record. …and he’s been a senator for years.
She quit her job as governor of Alaska. She is by definition a quitter.
Only an idiot never quits when the time comes. It was the most encouraging political news I’ve heard in years. You keep on calling her a quitter. We’ll see who looks ignorant in the future.
Hey Chris, I need to know if you have any female children so I can make nationwide sex jokes about them, especially the underage ones. While I’m at it, I need your address to file frivolous lawsuits you have to spend your own money to defend. Oh wait, do you have any special needs children I can criticize you for keeping? Are you sure its yours? Of course trying to defend yourself against all of that make will make your boss question your commitment because you won’t be working as much as you should. But, if you leave, your replacement will probably be able to do a good job because half the country won’t be attacking their whole family in pernicious and downright horrible ways. Not that I’m a bad person for doing these things, it’s just politics and 6 month old Down’s syndrome babies are fair game in anybody’s book.
She quit her job as governor of Alaska. She is by definition a quitter.
By that definition, so is Barack Obama. He quit his job after four years of his first Senate term, and the previous two years he spent campaigning for president instead of doing his job. Why is what Sarah Palin did worse than what he did?
Why is what Sarah Palin did worse than what he did?
He quit to assume the Presidency. Please remember, had McCain won, she’d have quit to go be VP.
It’s one thing to quit and assume a higher office, something else to quit so you can go home and sulk, or whatever it is she’s doing.
He quit to assume the Presidency.
So? Are you now changing your definition of a “quitter” as “someone who quits”? Are you saying that Obama is not a “quitter”? At least Sarah Palin tried to do her job until it became untenable to do so, instead of abandoning it to go run for president two years into it, and not allow someone else to replace her. Obama should have quit earlier if he wanted to run for president as (for example) Bob Dole did.
Please remember, had McCain won, she’d have quit to go be VP.
Who said I had forgotten that? You’re the one arbitrarily calling people quitters, not me.
When called out on your pathetic and partisan attempt to slam her by simply calling her a quitter, you now say it’s bad because you don’t like the reason she quit. You know what? We don’t give a damn whether you like it or not. You were never going to vote for her anyway.
Rand, if you can’t see or won’t accept the difference between quitting to take a higher office and quitting because one can’t handle the job, then that’s not my problem.
Chris, give it up while you’re behind.
Hey Chris, hurry up with the info. I’ve already lined up 15 people to file suit against you. You better take off work so you can see your lawyer.
“…quitting because one can’t handle the job…”
What a disingenuous and ignorant thing to say. She handled the job just fine. She accomplished quite a bit in her time as Governor. Her family was taking hits and that’s just wrong.
So now your telling us that Sarah Palin is a liar when she gave clear reasons on July 3rd for why she was resigning. Care to sight any proof that she can’t handle the job or that she is sulking?
The fact that she did quit the job is not evidence that she can’t handle it. Her statement is that she chose not to for good reasons. Her accomplishments as governor (again read the july 3rd speech) indicate she handled the job better than most if not all other governors. Arnold wishes he could handle his job as well.
You Chris can continue to slander her, but it will not stick.
At least Sarah Palin tried to do her job until it became untenable to do so
Untenable according to her. No one else in the governor’s office seemed to think it was untenable — they were as surprised as the rest of the world when she quit.
No one thinks you’re a quitter for leaving your AAA team to play in the majors. No one thinks you’re a quitter for leaving the ranks to become an officer, or leaving Congress to become President. Everyone knows that you’re quitting for an obvious reason: you’ve been promoted. You’re doing the same thing you promised to do, on a bigger stage.
But when you leave your office before the end of your term, for reasons that are clear only to you and your truest true believers, with vague and/or secret future plans; then people are going to call you a quitter.
Palin asked the voters for the honor of serving as governor; they said yes. Now Palin is saying that she alone knows what she should be doing to serve those voters, better than they could know themselves. That valuing of a secret, personal calling, above the common sense guideline that you finish the job you promised to do even when it stops being your personal dream job, is the hallmark of a narcissist and/or quitter.
Bill Maron – I’m in the phone book. I’m sure my legal defense team (should I need it) would find this blog thread interesting.
Jim – well put. I suspect this group won’t understand it, but well put.
No one thinks you’re a quitter for leaving your AAA team to play in the majors. No one thinks you’re a quitter for leaving the ranks to become an officer, or leaving Congress to become President. Everyone knows that you’re quitting for an obvious reason: you’ve been promoted.
Chris told us that you’re a quitter if you quit. Full stop. He only changed his tune after I pointed out that the president is a quitter, too.
And perhaps she does consider what she’s about to do a promotion.
Palin is saying that she alone knows what she should be doing to serve those voters, better than they could know themselves.
Yes, just as Obama said that he alone knew what he should be doing to serve Illinois voters, by running for president after having served only two years, better than they could know themselves. After only two years, he decided that being a Senator didn’t serve his personal dream. But Barack Obama, the guy whose biggest achievement other than conning people into voting for him is writing two books about himself, he’s not a narcissist. No, not at all.
You Palin haters are pathetic.
I suspect this group won’t understand it
We understand sophistry and hypocrisy and double standards quite well, thank you.
What was Obama supposed to do as a US senator that he couldn’t do better as president? Even Illinois-specific pork, if he wanted to go after it, could be better obtained via either the presidency, or, if he had lost, by becoming a more powerful senator (by virtue of his increased following). Illinois was going to be well-served by Obama either way.
Members of the US House, members of state legislatures, and governors are all more focused on state-specific projects than US senators. You’d have a stronger case arguing that Obama shouldn’t have looked for a promotion from state senator to US senator. Although that brings up a funny story about disfunctional Illinois state senate, where members, including Republicans, recognizing his talent, would ask Obama “Barack, what are you doing here?!”
Rand, when the Palin store opens, I will buy you a hat too.
Although that brings up a funny story about disfunctional Illinois state senate, where members, including Republicans, recognizing his talent
It’s pretty hilarious to imagine that the political hacks and grifters of both parties who comprise the Illinois statehouse would be able to recognize talent, other than talent as another hack and grifter.
Rand, when the Palin store opens, I will buy you a hat too.
That should be “if,” not when. Is part of your fantasy about this that it will be in Union Station?
Anyway, if it happens, don’t waste your money. I wouldn’t wear one.
Rand – there is a concept called “implication.” It means “something not specifically said but inferred.” What was implied in my “Palin quits” post was “quit without going to a higher post.. I realize you don’t do implied well, having seen you get upset when somebody takes your inferences and implications wrong.
Also, I do not hate Palin. I think she is not qualified to be President, and has not shown the tenacity to stick with a job that would imply she was qualified for even statewide office. That does not mean hate. I am not qualified to sing opera, that does not mean I hate opera or opera singers.
Rand – there is a concept called “implication.” It means “something not specifically said but inferred.”
No, it means “something not specifically said but implied.” That’s why it’s called an “implication,” and not an “inference.” I find it amusing that you are lecturing me on things that you don’t even seem to understand yourself.
What was implied in my “Palin quits” post was “quit without going to a higher post.
You may have meant to imply that, but I saw no reason to infer it, and I doubt if many others not of your political persuasion did, either. You called her a quitter because she quit, period. You only changed your story after we pointed out that the Messiah was a quitter by the same standard (and worse, was a slacker on the job for two years before he quit).
Again, how do you know she doesn’t consider herself to be going to a “higher post”? Maybe hitting the campaign trail to help elect Republicans next year is a “higher post” than governor of Alaska. Who the hell are you to arbitrarily decide what is and is not a “higher post”?
I am not qualified to sing opera, that does not mean I hate opera or opera singers.
Well, that’s a bizarre non sequitur.
“something not specifically said but implied.” No, we’re both wrong (can’t define a word with the word itself.) Should be “meant to be inferred.”
Again, how do you know she doesn’t consider herself to be going to a “higher post”? Since when is the campaign manager considered more important than the candidate? Except, she wouldn’t even be the campaign manager – she’d just be a cheerleader.
bizarre non sequitur. No, a metaphor, put in since you lumped me in with the Sarah Palin “haters.” “Not qualified” is not the same as “hate.”
Maybe hitting the campaign trail to help elect Republicans next year is a “higher post” than governor of Alaska.
A “higher post” to whom? So far the only person who might know what she will do next, and the only person evaluating whether it represents a “higher post”, is Palin herself. In her resignation statement should could have said “I think that electing Republicans is more important to the future of our country than serving as governor of Alaska, so that’s where I’m going to put my time and energy.” But she didn’t say that, or anything like that.
My impression is that she doesn’t know exactly what she’ll do next, but she’s sure that whatever it is, it will be better than sticking around the governor’s office. She’s asking the voters who elected her to never mind the specifics, just trust her and her motives.
Except, she wouldn’t even be the campaign manager – she’d just be a cheerleader.
I think that Rush Limbaugh was more important in the 1994 election than any elected Republican, with the exception of Newt Gingrich.
she’s sure that whatever it is, it will be better than sticking around the governor’s office.
Yes, better for her, and better for Alaska, since the people who continue to harass her with time-consuming frivolous ethics charges are determined to keep her from doing her job.
Wrong again Jim…
But she didn’t say that, or anything like that.
And there is such a need to BUILD up and FIGHT for our state and our country. I choose to FIGHT for it! And I’ll work hard for others who still believe in free enterprise and smaller government; strong national security for our country and support for our troops; energy independence; and for those who will protect freedom and equality and LIFE… I’ll work for and campaign for those PROUD to be American, and those who are INSPIRED by our ideals and won’t deride them.
I WILL support others who seek to serve, in or out of office, for the RIGHT reasons, and I don’t care what party they’re in or no party at all. Inside Alaska – or Outside Alaska.
Proving once again that you Jim do not know what you are talking about… or are so disingenuous that you do and don’t care. Your arguments are beginning to sound like Biden’s… or any other lying politician. Have you considered running for office? You’d fit right in.
Ken:
She said she’d campaign for other people; she did not say that’s why she was quitting. Lots of sitting governors campaign for others.
She said she’d campaign for other people; she did not say that’s why she was quitting. Lots of sitting governors campaign for others.
Not from Alaska. Think about it.
So Jim, you’ve decided to double down and be wrong… yet… again.
The statement she made following that which I quoted above was…
But I won’t do it from the Governor’s desk.
So yes, it was part of her decision to quit.
I’ve presented you with… anything like that but keep showing what a tool you are.
Not from Alaska. Think about it.
Why not? She’s spent plenty of time out of Alaska the last 2 1/2 years. Their legislature is only in session 90 days a year. Palin can go into labor in Texas, give a speech, and still be back in Wasilla in time to give birth. She runs Alaska from an office that’s an airplane ride from Juneau anyway; she might as well be in Iowa as in Anchorage.
But I won’t do it from the Governor’s desk.
That’s a statement of what, not of why. The why is not nearly as simple as “because I want to campaign for other people,” which was the whole point of my comment.
She’s spent plenty of time out of Alaska the last 2 1/2 years.
And been roundly criticized for it.
Well she promised over the weekend to hit the national stage runing after the end of the month, so I guess well see what she has in mind.
Certainly what ever she does, it will enrage and interest folks.
😉
Jim, I believe I’ll just have to do what you suggested… just trust her and her motives.
This is something I will gladly do with Sarah and something I’ve hardly ever been able to do with most all other politicians. Perhaps this has something to do with her appeal?
It’s refreshing that she says what she means and I’m in general agreement with her motivations. Others might represent me better, but the bar has been so lowered that a mom from Wasilla sounds pretty darn good to a lot of American’s… The kind of Americans that have been so disgusted with the choices they are generally given that they don’t bother. She has the ability to make them bother. Whether she can help overcome the takeover at all levels of government (not just elected) that have over time taken away our freedom, time will only tell. It’s too big a job for one woman or even one generation, but it is the good fight.
Just think how history had been different if Bill Clinton had been “a quitter.”
In the teeth of the Lewinsky scandal, he could have proclaimed that he “did nothing wrong” and was being “hounded out of office” by the “vast right-wing conspiracy”, he could have stepped down, Al Gore would become President, Mr. Gore could have claimed credit for the strong economy during the time he was Vice President and later President but without the cloud Mr. Clinton was under. Mr Gore would be elected President handily, and Mr. Clinton would be a kind of hero-martyr.
But noooooooooo! If there is any kind of epitath we can apply to Mr. Clinton, wouldn’t it be, “not-quitter, not-quitter, not-quitter, not-quitter!”
And been roundly criticized for it.
And she can’t go on doing what she’s been criticized for? Is that because she realizes that the critics were right, or because she can’t take unfounded criticism?
And she can’t go on doing what she’s been criticized for?
Yes, she could, but it wouldn’t have been best for her Alaskan constituents, or her own financial well being.
Is that because she realizes that the critics were right, or because she can’t take unfounded criticism?
No, either of those would be a stupid conclusion, because she had been taking it for almost a year, even in the face of a tough political campaign.
The partisan Democrat in me wants Palin to play as big a role as possible in GOP politics. She’s kryptonite to independent voters, and if she were nominated in 2012 it would be like 1964 again.
As a citizen, however, I think the country needs a sane Republican party, and the GOP’s infatuation with Palin makes that less likely. I expect that, like Ross Perot, she will eventually disillusion even her most ardent disciples, but in the mean time it’s a sad thing for a patriot to watch.
…it’s a sad thing for a patriot to watch.
I’ll refrain from my first impulse (to say “How would you know?”) to just say, how wonderful that we have a concern troll.
She’s kryptonite to independent voters
If that were true, why bother with the smears? Hmmm?
The smear tactics were successful. They will not be so in the future. The left has a lot to fear from Sarah Palin and they know it.
If that were true, why bother with the smears?
People are sometimes afraid of the unfamiliar, and last year Palin was a virtual unknown. Her life experience and worldview are utterly alien to most of the people in the national media and national political world of both parties, and as they struggled to make sense of her they went overboard in all sorts of directions.
She doesn’t get another chance to make a first impression. Much as Gore could never overcome his image as a stiff who took credit for things he hadn’t done, and Quayle never overcame his image as a dunce, Palin is not going to be able to leave behind her public identity as a partisan hatchet woman fueled by resentment, suddenly thrust into a prominence far beyond the limitations of her abilities and experience.
She recently said something to the effect of “Don’t explain; your enemies won’t believe you, and your friends don’t need it.” But in politics your friends and your enemies only add up to 60 or 70% of the voters; you win or lose based on whether you can explain yourself to the rest of them. Palin does not seem interested in even trying.
The left has a lot to fear from Sarah Palin and they know it.
The thing we know she can do is fire up the GOP base. But that isn’t the GOP’s problem — its problem is that the base has shrunk, geographically and ideologically. Palin is not going to win back New England, or Florida, or the Mountain West. She’s not going to win over pro-choice women, or poor Hispanics, or independents who are fiscally conservative but socially liberal. She isn’t the one to grow the GOP.
Palin is not going to be able to leave behind her public identity…
You mean the false identity the media created; You and they seriously underestimate what is about to happen. Some people do get a second chance… and if the left didn’t fear it they wouldn’t continue to smear her as I’ve seen them do this very day. That’s real fear my friend (just an expression. Don’t expect me to break out the marshmallows.)
She can do a hell of a lot more than just fire up the GOP base
Reality is about to hit home. People are beginning to wake up to the false messiah. Then her message will begin to resonate the way Reagan’s did after Carter. She can also do other things behind the scenes that are just as important if not more but not as easy for the smear campaign to effect.
I do believe she needs more experience and she is going to get it and put it to good use. The left has the advantage of the media whores and stolen tax money to keep them in power. Palin has the advantage of speaking the truth and getting people to listen. More and more people will listen.
She’s not trying to grow the GOP. The GOP is part of the problem. She was getting things done with democrats in Alaska until the national party put a stop to that. Party politics is a huge part of the problem.
her public identity as a partisan hatchet woman fueled by resentment, suddenly thrust into a prominence far beyond the limitations of her abilities and experience.
She only has that identity with hyperpartisan hatchet men like you. If Nixon can come back, certainly Sarah Palin can.
If you strike her down, she will come back stronger than you can believe…
I really do not know what she plans. She may go on to be a Housewife or she may go on to be President. She may land somewhere between.
What I do know is that for some reason the Left is terribly afraid of her and she causes their heads to explode.
She also scares many Republicans and almost all talking heads on the news.
That makes me smile.
The Left has become so reactionary that they go after anyone who dares challenger their divinely-ordained and absolute rule, no matter how small or otherwise insignificant. Just ask Ricci.
Can’t speak for “the left” but this center-left individual isn’t afraid of her. I just think she’s ignorant.
Please note – ignorance is “a lack of knowledge” and can be fixed. I see no indication that she has the stamina or the desire to do so.
See that radical leftist Peggy Noonan’s article for an elaboration of my views.
It’s been years since I cared what Peggy Noonan thought about…much of anything.
I can guess why you wrongly think she’s ignorant Chris. If you think Charles Gibson proved her to be ignorant you’d be wrong. He was the moron and her answers to him were absolutely precisely correct. If you think Katie Couric made her look ignorant, you’d be right; the same way editing can make anyone thoughtful (and suspicious of exactly what resulted) be made to look ignorant.
Was she ignorant of international issues? Not the one’s she had to deal with as governor. You and I would be the ignorant ones if that were the standard.
Everybody is ignorant. Being so stupid as to accuse someone as intelligent and successful as Sarah Palin of being ignorant only exposes that you’ve been duped by a dangerous media intent on keeping you ignorant.
Oh, and you’d be magnificently ignorant if you called her a quitter.
Ken Anthony – So Kathie Couric edited out the smart response to “what newspapers do you read” and left in “all of them?” (Actually, I saw the interview – it was less coherent then that.)
I did not run for Vice President. I expect the person who runs for Vice President to know more about foreign policy then I do. That’s part of the job description.
The definition of the word “quitter” is “one who quits.” She quit her job as governor of Alaska. She is by definition a quitter.
So instead of the “not-smarter-than-Chris-Gerrib” Sarah Palin as vice-president, we got the “smarter-than-Chris-Gerrib” Joseph Biden.
For some reason I’m reminded of a bit of Escherian logic my dad sprang on me when I was a kid:
For the record, the attempt to baffle me failed because I rejected the first premise. I think I’ll reject Chris’ premise as well.
So instead of the “not-smarter-than-Chris-Gerrib” Sarah Palin as vice-president, we got the “smarter-than-Chris-Gerrib” Joseph Biden.
That was a low blow, but well deserved.
The problem with that “logic” is the marvelous ambiguity from human language. Which is why you should use a non-ambiguous way of expressing such constructs when doing logic reasoning.
I’m wondering whether the House passage of the cap and trade bill was what prompted Palin’s resignation, combined with the fact that Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R, Alaska), sponsored a cap-and-trade bill a couple years ago, and might possibly support the new one when it comes up in the Senate, even though Alaska is an oil-producing state. Palin may know whether Murkowski plans to support it. Murkowski will come up for election next year.
Maybe Palin wants to be free of the governorship so she can concentrate on running against Murkowski in the Republican primary? Or maybe she wants Murkowski to be afraid that she might, to encourage her to vote against cap-and-trade?
I saw the interview – it was less coherent then that
No you didn’t Chris. You saw an edited version designed to make her look stupid and you bought it.
Why did Kathie Couric ask (and persist in asking) “what newspapers do you read”. What was her motivation? I’ve read that at that point Sarah’s guard was up because she was suspicious of the question.
How do you know that Sarah’s answer, “all of them?” was not in response to a list they previously discussed? You don’t.
This is how you decide that somebody is ignorant??? Pick a few isolated incidents and get out your broad brush??? It makes you look pretty ignorant. Answer ten question and you could be a millionaire. Or is every body so damned ignorant. Politicians can’t afford the easy answer, “I’ll have to look into that” too often; instead they do what Biden does, make stuff up and present it as fact. If the media chooses only to correct one party, who’s the ignorant party?
I expect the person who runs for Vice President to know more about foreign policy then I do.
Her job was Governor. To this point in her life, international affairs may not have been much interest to her. I imagine she will make up for that now. Even with any mistakes she may have made, she still knows more than Biden if you bother to check the record. …and he’s been a senator for years.
She quit her job as governor of Alaska. She is by definition a quitter.
Only an idiot never quits when the time comes. It was the most encouraging political news I’ve heard in years. You keep on calling her a quitter. We’ll see who looks ignorant in the future.
Hey Chris, I need to know if you have any female children so I can make nationwide sex jokes about them, especially the underage ones. While I’m at it, I need your address to file frivolous lawsuits you have to spend your own money to defend. Oh wait, do you have any special needs children I can criticize you for keeping? Are you sure its yours? Of course trying to defend yourself against all of that make will make your boss question your commitment because you won’t be working as much as you should. But, if you leave, your replacement will probably be able to do a good job because half the country won’t be attacking their whole family in pernicious and downright horrible ways. Not that I’m a bad person for doing these things, it’s just politics and 6 month old Down’s syndrome babies are fair game in anybody’s book.
She quit her job as governor of Alaska. She is by definition a quitter.
By that definition, so is Barack Obama. He quit his job after four years of his first Senate term, and the previous two years he spent campaigning for president instead of doing his job. Why is what Sarah Palin did worse than what he did?
Why is what Sarah Palin did worse than what he did?
He quit to assume the Presidency. Please remember, had McCain won, she’d have quit to go be VP.
It’s one thing to quit and assume a higher office, something else to quit so you can go home and sulk, or whatever it is she’s doing.
He quit to assume the Presidency.
So? Are you now changing your definition of a “quitter” as “someone who quits”? Are you saying that Obama is not a “quitter”? At least Sarah Palin tried to do her job until it became untenable to do so, instead of abandoning it to go run for president two years into it, and not allow someone else to replace her. Obama should have quit earlier if he wanted to run for president as (for example) Bob Dole did.
Please remember, had McCain won, she’d have quit to go be VP.
Who said I had forgotten that? You’re the one arbitrarily calling people quitters, not me.
When called out on your pathetic and partisan attempt to slam her by simply calling her a quitter, you now say it’s bad because you don’t like the reason she quit. You know what? We don’t give a damn whether you like it or not. You were never going to vote for her anyway.
Rand, if you can’t see or won’t accept the difference between quitting to take a higher office and quitting because one can’t handle the job, then that’s not my problem.
Chris, give it up while you’re behind.
Hey Chris, hurry up with the info. I’ve already lined up 15 people to file suit against you. You better take off work so you can see your lawyer.
“…quitting because one can’t handle the job…”
What a disingenuous and ignorant thing to say. She handled the job just fine. She accomplished quite a bit in her time as Governor. Her family was taking hits and that’s just wrong.
http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2009/07/024014.php
So now your telling us that Sarah Palin is a liar when she gave clear reasons on July 3rd for why she was resigning. Care to sight any proof that she can’t handle the job or that she is sulking?
The fact that she did quit the job is not evidence that she can’t handle it. Her statement is that she chose not to for good reasons. Her accomplishments as governor (again read the july 3rd speech) indicate she handled the job better than most if not all other governors. Arnold wishes he could handle his job as well.
You Chris can continue to slander her, but it will not stick.
At least Sarah Palin tried to do her job until it became untenable to do so
Untenable according to her. No one else in the governor’s office seemed to think it was untenable — they were as surprised as the rest of the world when she quit.
No one thinks you’re a quitter for leaving your AAA team to play in the majors. No one thinks you’re a quitter for leaving the ranks to become an officer, or leaving Congress to become President. Everyone knows that you’re quitting for an obvious reason: you’ve been promoted. You’re doing the same thing you promised to do, on a bigger stage.
But when you leave your office before the end of your term, for reasons that are clear only to you and your truest true believers, with vague and/or secret future plans; then people are going to call you a quitter.
Palin asked the voters for the honor of serving as governor; they said yes. Now Palin is saying that she alone knows what she should be doing to serve those voters, better than they could know themselves. That valuing of a secret, personal calling, above the common sense guideline that you finish the job you promised to do even when it stops being your personal dream job, is the hallmark of a narcissist and/or quitter.
Bill Maron – I’m in the phone book. I’m sure my legal defense team (should I need it) would find this blog thread interesting.
Jim – well put. I suspect this group won’t understand it, but well put.
No one thinks you’re a quitter for leaving your AAA team to play in the majors. No one thinks you’re a quitter for leaving the ranks to become an officer, or leaving Congress to become President. Everyone knows that you’re quitting for an obvious reason: you’ve been promoted.
Chris told us that you’re a quitter if you quit. Full stop. He only changed his tune after I pointed out that the president is a quitter, too.
And perhaps she does consider what she’s about to do a promotion.
Palin is saying that she alone knows what she should be doing to serve those voters, better than they could know themselves.
Yes, just as Obama said that he alone knew what he should be doing to serve Illinois voters, by running for president after having served only two years, better than they could know themselves. After only two years, he decided that being a Senator didn’t serve his personal dream. But Barack Obama, the guy whose biggest achievement other than conning people into voting for him is writing two books about himself, he’s not a narcissist. No, not at all.
You Palin haters are pathetic.
I suspect this group won’t understand it
We understand sophistry and hypocrisy and double standards quite well, thank you.
What was Obama supposed to do as a US senator that he couldn’t do better as president? Even Illinois-specific pork, if he wanted to go after it, could be better obtained via either the presidency, or, if he had lost, by becoming a more powerful senator (by virtue of his increased following). Illinois was going to be well-served by Obama either way.
Members of the US House, members of state legislatures, and governors are all more focused on state-specific projects than US senators. You’d have a stronger case arguing that Obama shouldn’t have looked for a promotion from state senator to US senator. Although that brings up a funny story about disfunctional Illinois state senate, where members, including Republicans, recognizing his talent, would ask Obama “Barack, what are you doing here?!”
Rand, when the Palin store opens, I will buy you a hat too.
Although that brings up a funny story about disfunctional Illinois state senate, where members, including Republicans, recognizing his talent
It’s pretty hilarious to imagine that the political hacks and grifters of both parties who comprise the Illinois statehouse would be able to recognize talent, other than talent as another hack and grifter.
Rand, when the Palin store opens, I will buy you a hat too.
That should be “if,” not when. Is part of your fantasy about this that it will be in Union Station?
Anyway, if it happens, don’t waste your money. I wouldn’t wear one.
Rand – there is a concept called “implication.” It means “something not specifically said but inferred.” What was implied in my “Palin quits” post was “quit without going to a higher post.. I realize you don’t do implied well, having seen you get upset when somebody takes your inferences and implications wrong.
Also, I do not hate Palin. I think she is not qualified to be President, and has not shown the tenacity to stick with a job that would imply she was qualified for even statewide office. That does not mean hate. I am not qualified to sing opera, that does not mean I hate opera or opera singers.
Rand – there is a concept called “implication.” It means “something not specifically said but inferred.”
No, it means “something not specifically said but implied.” That’s why it’s called an “implication,” and not an “inference.” I find it amusing that you are lecturing me on things that you don’t even seem to understand yourself.
What was implied in my “Palin quits” post was “quit without going to a higher post.
You may have meant to imply that, but I saw no reason to infer it, and I doubt if many others not of your political persuasion did, either. You called her a quitter because she quit, period. You only changed your story after we pointed out that the Messiah was a quitter by the same standard (and worse, was a slacker on the job for two years before he quit).
Again, how do you know she doesn’t consider herself to be going to a “higher post”? Maybe hitting the campaign trail to help elect Republicans next year is a “higher post” than governor of Alaska. Who the hell are you to arbitrarily decide what is and is not a “higher post”?
I am not qualified to sing opera, that does not mean I hate opera or opera singers.
Well, that’s a bizarre non sequitur.
“something not specifically said but implied.” No, we’re both wrong (can’t define a word with the word itself.) Should be “meant to be inferred.”
Again, how do you know she doesn’t consider herself to be going to a “higher post”? Since when is the campaign manager considered more important than the candidate? Except, she wouldn’t even be the campaign manager – she’d just be a cheerleader.
bizarre non sequitur. No, a metaphor, put in since you lumped me in with the Sarah Palin “haters.” “Not qualified” is not the same as “hate.”
Maybe hitting the campaign trail to help elect Republicans next year is a “higher post” than governor of Alaska.
A “higher post” to whom? So far the only person who might know what she will do next, and the only person evaluating whether it represents a “higher post”, is Palin herself. In her resignation statement should could have said “I think that electing Republicans is more important to the future of our country than serving as governor of Alaska, so that’s where I’m going to put my time and energy.” But she didn’t say that, or anything like that.
My impression is that she doesn’t know exactly what she’ll do next, but she’s sure that whatever it is, it will be better than sticking around the governor’s office. She’s asking the voters who elected her to never mind the specifics, just trust her and her motives.
Except, she wouldn’t even be the campaign manager – she’d just be a cheerleader.
I think that Rush Limbaugh was more important in the 1994 election than any elected Republican, with the exception of Newt Gingrich.
she’s sure that whatever it is, it will be better than sticking around the governor’s office.
Yes, better for her, and better for Alaska, since the people who continue to harass her with time-consuming frivolous ethics charges are determined to keep her from doing her job.
Wrong again Jim…
But she didn’t say that, or anything like that.
And there is such a need to BUILD up and FIGHT for our state and our country. I choose to FIGHT for it! And I’ll work hard for others who still believe in free enterprise and smaller government; strong national security for our country and support for our troops; energy independence; and for those who will protect freedom and equality and LIFE… I’ll work for and campaign for those PROUD to be American, and those who are INSPIRED by our ideals and won’t deride them.
I WILL support others who seek to serve, in or out of office, for the RIGHT reasons, and I don’t care what party they’re in or no party at all. Inside Alaska – or Outside Alaska.
Proving once again that you Jim do not know what you are talking about… or are so disingenuous that you do and don’t care. Your arguments are beginning to sound like Biden’s… or any other lying politician. Have you considered running for office? You’d fit right in.
Ken:
She said she’d campaign for other people; she did not say that’s why she was quitting. Lots of sitting governors campaign for others.
She said she’d campaign for other people; she did not say that’s why she was quitting. Lots of sitting governors campaign for others.
Not from Alaska. Think about it.
So Jim, you’ve decided to double down and be wrong… yet… again.
The statement she made following that which I quoted above was…
But I won’t do it from the Governor’s desk.
So yes, it was part of her decision to quit.
I’ve presented you with… anything like that but keep showing what a tool you are.
Not from Alaska. Think about it.
Why not? She’s spent plenty of time out of Alaska the last 2 1/2 years. Their legislature is only in session 90 days a year. Palin can go into labor in Texas, give a speech, and still be back in Wasilla in time to give birth. She runs Alaska from an office that’s an airplane ride from Juneau anyway; she might as well be in Iowa as in Anchorage.
But I won’t do it from the Governor’s desk.
That’s a statement of what, not of why. The why is not nearly as simple as “because I want to campaign for other people,” which was the whole point of my comment.
She’s spent plenty of time out of Alaska the last 2 1/2 years.
And been roundly criticized for it.
Well she promised over the weekend to hit the national stage runing after the end of the month, so I guess well see what she has in mind.
Certainly what ever she does, it will enrage and interest folks.
😉
Jim, I believe I’ll just have to do what you suggested… just trust her and her motives.
This is something I will gladly do with Sarah and something I’ve hardly ever been able to do with most all other politicians. Perhaps this has something to do with her appeal?
It’s refreshing that she says what she means and I’m in general agreement with her motivations. Others might represent me better, but the bar has been so lowered that a mom from Wasilla sounds pretty darn good to a lot of American’s… The kind of Americans that have been so disgusted with the choices they are generally given that they don’t bother. She has the ability to make them bother. Whether she can help overcome the takeover at all levels of government (not just elected) that have over time taken away our freedom, time will only tell. It’s too big a job for one woman or even one generation, but it is the good fight.
Just think how history had been different if Bill Clinton had been “a quitter.”
In the teeth of the Lewinsky scandal, he could have proclaimed that he “did nothing wrong” and was being “hounded out of office” by the “vast right-wing conspiracy”, he could have stepped down, Al Gore would become President, Mr. Gore could have claimed credit for the strong economy during the time he was Vice President and later President but without the cloud Mr. Clinton was under. Mr Gore would be elected President handily, and Mr. Clinton would be a kind of hero-martyr.
But noooooooooo! If there is any kind of epitath we can apply to Mr. Clinton, wouldn’t it be, “not-quitter, not-quitter, not-quitter, not-quitter!”
And been roundly criticized for it.
And she can’t go on doing what she’s been criticized for? Is that because she realizes that the critics were right, or because she can’t take unfounded criticism?
And she can’t go on doing what she’s been criticized for?
Yes, she could, but it wouldn’t have been best for her Alaskan constituents, or her own financial well being.
Is that because she realizes that the critics were right, or because she can’t take unfounded criticism?
No, either of those would be a stupid conclusion, because she had been taking it for almost a year, even in the face of a tough political campaign.
The partisan Democrat in me wants Palin to play as big a role as possible in GOP politics. She’s kryptonite to independent voters, and if she were nominated in 2012 it would be like 1964 again.
As a citizen, however, I think the country needs a sane Republican party, and the GOP’s infatuation with Palin makes that less likely. I expect that, like Ross Perot, she will eventually disillusion even her most ardent disciples, but in the mean time it’s a sad thing for a patriot to watch.
…it’s a sad thing for a patriot to watch.
I’ll refrain from my first impulse (to say “How would you know?”) to just say, how wonderful that we have a concern troll.
She’s kryptonite to independent voters
If that were true, why bother with the smears? Hmmm?
The smear tactics were successful. They will not be so in the future. The left has a lot to fear from Sarah Palin and they know it.
If that were true, why bother with the smears?
People are sometimes afraid of the unfamiliar, and last year Palin was a virtual unknown. Her life experience and worldview are utterly alien to most of the people in the national media and national political world of both parties, and as they struggled to make sense of her they went overboard in all sorts of directions.
She doesn’t get another chance to make a first impression. Much as Gore could never overcome his image as a stiff who took credit for things he hadn’t done, and Quayle never overcame his image as a dunce, Palin is not going to be able to leave behind her public identity as a partisan hatchet woman fueled by resentment, suddenly thrust into a prominence far beyond the limitations of her abilities and experience.
She recently said something to the effect of “Don’t explain; your enemies won’t believe you, and your friends don’t need it.” But in politics your friends and your enemies only add up to 60 or 70% of the voters; you win or lose based on whether you can explain yourself to the rest of them. Palin does not seem interested in even trying.
The left has a lot to fear from Sarah Palin and they know it.
The thing we know she can do is fire up the GOP base. But that isn’t the GOP’s problem — its problem is that the base has shrunk, geographically and ideologically. Palin is not going to win back New England, or Florida, or the Mountain West. She’s not going to win over pro-choice women, or poor Hispanics, or independents who are fiscally conservative but socially liberal. She isn’t the one to grow the GOP.
Palin is not going to be able to leave behind her public identity…
You mean the false identity the media created; You and they seriously underestimate what is about to happen. Some people do get a second chance… and if the left didn’t fear it they wouldn’t continue to smear her as I’ve seen them do this very day. That’s real fear my friend (just an expression. Don’t expect me to break out the marshmallows.)
She can do a hell of a lot more than just fire up the GOP base
Reality is about to hit home. People are beginning to wake up to the false messiah. Then her message will begin to resonate the way Reagan’s did after Carter. She can also do other things behind the scenes that are just as important if not more but not as easy for the smear campaign to effect.
I do believe she needs more experience and she is going to get it and put it to good use. The left has the advantage of the media whores and stolen tax money to keep them in power. Palin has the advantage of speaking the truth and getting people to listen. More and more people will listen.
She’s not trying to grow the GOP. The GOP is part of the problem. She was getting things done with democrats in Alaska until the national party put a stop to that. Party politics is a huge part of the problem.
her public identity as a partisan hatchet woman fueled by resentment, suddenly thrust into a prominence far beyond the limitations of her abilities and experience.
She only has that identity with hyperpartisan hatchet men like you. If Nixon can come back, certainly Sarah Palin can.