http://www.time.com/time/natio.....-2,00.html

She echoes many of the points here however already I’m starting to see more clarity in her language. There are many, many quotes that’ll make you want to pump your fist with a solid “Right on!”

Edit: And actually, as I’m looking at all the news outlets, I’m seeing that the full-court press is on as she’s making the MSM rounds.

Edit #2: And look how the AP reports on the Time interview: “The outgoing Alaska governor told the Anchorage Daily News she stepped down because ethics complaints against her and her squabble with lawmakers would have paralyzed the 18 months she had left in office.

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/s.....7-08-23-20

Amazing.

I agree with you, and it isn’t what I was saying.

But if she wants to challenge at the national level, she can’t be a lone ranger. I guess it’s conceivable that she could do so, but it’s highly unlikely she would succeed. She doesn’t need handlers, but a group of like-thinking people with expertise in different areas, because, unlike the Moron, she shouldn’t try to pose as an expert on everything from abortion to Zulu history.

But if she allows her personal characteristics to be “managed” to appeal to this and that group, she will lose the people who love her for who she is today.

Sarah has already been (and will continue to be) tried by fire. She’s got staying power. When your retirement from the governorship of one of the smallest states in the Union gets this much press, your goose isn’t cooked. (And isn’t it fun to see so many Washington insiders flummoxed by her normalcy?)

Sarah will learn from whatever she enters into next. I see a rare humility in what she just did. She could have hung onto power, but at what cost to the citizens of Alaska?

She can define herself more freely now, and her attackers will lose credibility as she gains it, as long as she’s willing to stay on the scene in some fashion. And as credibility is essential to persuasion, persuasion essential to getting elected, don’t count her out yet.

It’s a good point, and it’s why Sarah needs some time, if she is interested in running for President, to prepare herself in the behaviours that intellectual conservatives care about.

There’s nothing wrong with being down-home, but an office-seeker needs to do the things necessary to appeal to a broad enough range of voters to win. Reagen did it. So can Sarah.

She needs to never again be trapped by the “supreme court decisions” question (which next time, will be something else). She needs to demonstrate that she can develop a team of advisors that can hold it’s own. And she needs to develop a compelling response to the hick from Wasilla argument, which she has already done to an extent, but the response needs to be much stronger.

And are by-passing a beautiful, strong, normal person who doesn’t do well in contrived, set up interviews – Palin might have said – what’s the difference between a pit bull and a hockey mom – once too often but come on – look at the Obama/Biden ticket – it was full of simplistic innuendo filled platitudes – Yes We Can, Hope and Change. That has become the nature of the beast.

It is all just one more step, one more reason that Americans are dumbed down into simplistic sheeple. I myself, however, prefer a candidate who has a belief, a value system and a deep and abiding concern for America, her citizens and a belief in God – don’t care about how they look, how they speak or how young or old they are.

Getting used to a Texas way of speaking (and doing), Alaskan or even Kentucky (I really haven’t spent a lot of time and/or living in the deep South) – takes some time – but it does not mean someone is stupid, intellectually dense or worthless –

But leave it to the tolerant Liberals to believe exactly those things about a real strong woman, no less – I guess to them it was a choice between being seen as a racist or a sexist and once again – racism always win.

She has learned, as the rest of us have, the GOP is really nothing but a pack of two-faced dogs in heat (no offense to dogs). I was hopeful when Michael Steele was elected to RNC, but it’s the same-o, same-o. The Grand Old Party is really a misnome, it should stand for the Mediocre Old Party.

“Don’t even go there!”

Surprised and intrigued, I asked, “Wow, what did she do to piss you off?”

He fed me the arguments: she’s intellectually meek, she doesn’t carry herself at the level in which a national politician should, etc etc.

I said, “Alright, but perhaps with the time away from governing Alaska she can immerse herself in the national issues and get a clearer picture of how she can effectively articulate them to the public?”

The discussion then shifted gears and he commented that public service life is just too taxing on one’s family as it is, and with such circumstances already surrounding her children it just seemed irresponsible that she would get this far into the game.

I replied, “Fair enough, even though after the election it was the media that wanted to keep her (and her children) in the spotlight; but with the situation as it is now, is it becoming of a mother to essentially teach her children to bow out to bullying?”

To which he had no response, yet nevertheless I could see that I hadn’t struck a chord.

I’m resolved to conclude that you simply have your intellectual conservatives and you have your values conservatives. In this era where elegant words mean more than actions, it would seem the intellectual conservatives are demanding a candidate that excels in both (since they think it would take both to reach enough of ‘stupid America’ to win an election). They look at Sarah and probably see the same ‘cult of personality’ forming around her that could parallel Obama’s, and they probably have a visceral reaction to that.

Ultimately, I think they just want to keep us grounded in reality, not sailing off into the land of ‘Hope.’

But to me that viewpoint is nothing more than haughtiness – choices are what matter, not words, and to me Sarah’s choices speak much louder than any words ever could or need to.

S&L is one of the best-behaved sites around. It’s unlikely he is talking at us.

There is a surprising amount of anti-Palin talk on a lot of conservative sites. The basic knocks are that she isn’t intellectually sophisticated enough and that by resigning she has demonstrated that she’s a quitter. I don’t buy either one of those, but you can see how the arguments can be made.

But at least the conservative sites don’t accuse her of eating babies and fornicating with lizards like the respected msm satellites so.

Ace’s “special comment” on Palinistas

But there is a mentality in the nutroots that if you dare to post a poll showing Republicans down and say “we’re in trouble, we need a game-changer,” well, that means you’re secretly rooting against our side.
And if you say that Fred Thompson isn’t catching on as hoped, well, you hate Fred Thomson.
And if you do not believe that Sarah Palin has some double-secret probation plan for the presidency, you must hate her too, and you’re rooting against her, and cheering for the other side.
This is f[------] insane and it must stop. I will not be bullied by this ludicrous magical thinking brigade who insists that only Nice and Positive Words must be uttered or else one is contributing one’s Evil Energy to the Wrong Side.
It’s insane.
I disagree with you. I have tried to do so pleasantly but I am tired of the imputation of bad motive simply because I am more realistic and less prone to flights of hopeful fancy than you.
If you think I’m wrong, say so. I do not mind being called wrong. I do, however, greatly mind being called a traitor, of harboring a secret agenda I hide from you in order to advance the MSM’s interests, etc., and all the rest of this insane bull[-----].

I get the feeling that we are the “nutroots” Palinistas that “Ace” is accusing of trying to strong-arm him with insults and threats. But I’m lost. Someone explain this to me. I check in with this site all day and nobody on her is throwing profanity at conservatives who criticize Palin. We just happen to support her. I don’t think we’re nuts. Nor do I think we dismiss obvious needs for improvement in Palin.

Why are people swearing at us and calling us nuts and saying we aren’t gracious about listening to them, when in fact we are sitting here having a reasoned debate and getting sworn at and parodied in four-letter words by people on other right-wing websites?

I suppose Sarah & Todd will be flooded with ideas from people. I hope someone on her team is reading this site. Considering how S&L has ties to Ann Coulter, maybe the Palins will notice us talking about them and think about some of these possibilities.

http://corner.nationalreview.c.....ZjY2VkZjc=

To paraphrase, it doesn’t matter what the critics say about her resignation, they can’t possibly be worse than the lies they have and will say about her. Resigning gives her a change to lecture, study and build a team.

But thanks!

It’s a sad thing to say but if Steele truly cares about his party, but isn’t going to do what’s needed to take the reigns of Republican leadership, then he should step aside for someone who will. I have nothing against the man other than that he’s still in the camp of getting everyone to play nice. He’s a decent guy and a good republican, but evidently not a capable leader, and sadly I think he was elected as chair by the RINOs who were still afraid of the ‘racist republican’ stereotype at a time when a hugely popular black liberal president had been elected.

I’m not sure about the rule-book for the RNC; one still maintains their private citizen standing, correct? I think that element is crucial right now for her battle with the media. This idea that she is out of politics really serves to her advantage right now, so perhaps that position is a good place for her in the nearer future.

Thank you for asking! A very thought-provoking and enjoyable discussion as usual my friend.