Palin frightens Left
This morning, the Washington Post provides two opposing opinions of Sarah Palin. The first is a news story about a poll, a Washington Post/ABC poll in regards to support for Palin among Americans;
Although Palin is a tea party favorite, her potential as a presidential hopeful takes a severe hit in the survey. Fifty-five percent of Americans have unfavorable views of her, while the percentage holding favorable views has dipped to 37, a new low in Post-ABC polling.
There is a growing sense that the former Alaska governor is not qualified to serve as president, with more than seven in 10 Americans now saying she is unqualified, up from 60 percent in a November survey. Even among Republicans, a majority now say Palin lacks the qualifications necessary for the White House.
Palin has lost ground among conservative Republicans, who would be crucial to her hopes if she seeks the party’s presidential nomination in 2012. Forty-five percent of conservatives now consider her as qualified for the presidency, down sharply from 66 percent who said so last fall.
Qualified? I don’t even know what that means anymore after watching the amateur talent show that currently occupies the West Wing of the White House. That clown car skit that careens in one direction then comically switches direction 180 degrees, dumps off riders and skitters off into the stands.
Of course, a similar poll in the late 70s might have discovered the same sentiment in regards to Ronald Reagan.
But it’s difficult to overcome the media’s trumpeting of the two smartest guys to ever work in the White House – Obama and Biden. Obama has never made decision and Biden had never voiced a policy decision that was right. Poll the public on that, Washington Post.
The other article is an opinion piece by David Broder in which he warns the Democrats that Palin can actually beat them in 2012 if they don’t take her seriously.
Freed of the responsibilities she carried as governor of Alaska, devoid of any official title but armed with regular gigs on Fox News Channel and more speaking invitations than she can fulfill, Palin is perhaps the most visible Republican in the land.
More important, she has locked herself firmly in the populist embrace that every skillful outsider candidate from George Wallace to Jimmy Carter to Ronald Reagan to Bill Clinton has utilized when running against “the political establishment.”
George Wallace? Hardly. But the most instructive part of the article isn’t in Broder’s piece, it’s in the readers’ comments a sample of which I’ve captured for posterity;
I’ll grant that the Washington Post’s readers are hardly representative of mainstream American voters, but it does demonstrate the fear level in regards to Palin among Democrats. If you support Palin, you’re a clown, a pervert and a Nazi. Some of you who were here during the 2008 elections remember that the main reason the leftists didn’t support Palin was because she was “scary” – apparently more scary than Joe Biden who has been consistently wrong on every US policy for the last thirty years. Joe Biden who plagiarized his way through college and still only got mediocre grades…which he lies about these days.
Yes, Republicans might be moving away from Palin – but they do that. They run away from viable candidates because they listen to Democrats and pick candidates the Democrats tell Republicans they like – which is how we got John McCain on the ticket.
Category: Barack Obama/Joe Biden, Jimmy Carter, John McCain/Sarah Palin, Politics
It’s the classic Dem tactic of marginalizing Republicans they fear. Reagan and Bush were dumb, Gingrich and Cheney were mean, Goldwater was mean AND crazy, blah blah blah blah blah….
I don’t listen to them anymore.
Hmm I wonder how many Republicans think Obama is qualified to be president?
Funny thing about conservatives. We tend to look at a resume and not how well you impress the judges on American Idol.
I will agree that from a PR point of view Sarah has an awful lot to overcome, but you know something, holding elected office may not be her forte. Being a voice for that large section of Americans who have no voice, and are always being dismissed by ruling and educated elites may be where she can best serve.
God knows she can’t seem to go anywhere or say anything without it being parsed to the nth degree by her critics. I am surprised we haven’t seen stories criticizing her dinner selections.
She is the shining embodiment of the flat earther, no-nothing crowd. She would be hilarious if the whole thing weren’t so scary.
And to explain the lefts justifiable reaction to her, look no further than Thomas Jefferson (you remember him), “Ridicule is the only weapon that can be used against unintelligible propositions (or people)”.
More insightful name calling from the brainless Left. Thanks, Joe, for demonstrating for the rest what I was writing about.
Joe is the gift that keeps on giving.
If I were you, Joe, I wouldn’t be so quick to open yer piehole about intelligence and qualifications to be President. Or, I you sure there are 57 states and those Corpse men are doing a bang up job? You stand with and defend a guy with no leadership skills and his only claim to fame was editor of Hahvad law review?
Yeah, you are sooo fucking smart. Your boy coudn’t tie his shoes without a blue ribbon panel and 3 months notice.
Not true.
Lay one of those new phonetics teleprompters on it’s side and he could tie his shoes in a few hours.
So there!
The flat-earth, KNOW nothing crowd? Wouldn’t that be Biden’s admirers, there Joey boy? Fixed your spelling for you, I know that being a public school grad, your education was deficient in many areas, like spelling, common sense, reasoning.
@JustAGrunt … “conservatives … tend to look at a resume and not how well you impress judges on American Idol” …
Seriously?!
All Palin has done, is try to “impress the judges” … she could have built her resume, but chose to quit instead. Why didn’t she show leadership by leading Alaska? She could have used it to build her credentials – something to show for 2012. Instead, she bailed on that state, because she thought that it might be difficult, and bailed. Bad leadership.
As far as that, “large section of Americans who have no voice and are being dismissed by the ruling and educated elites” … wha? Because people like Dick Armey, David Koch, and Newt Gingrich aren’t part of the *same* “ruling and educated elites?!” Oh, they’re *Republican* ruling and educated elites – you betcha! … 😉 (sorry, my wink is not as photogenic as Palin’s)
Lastly … what’s wrong with having a semi-literate, intelligent leader? It seems like being educated, these days, is seen as an epithet, instead of something we should admire and respect. I don’t get it. I can think of no country, organization, or unit that willingly says, “Give us the stupidest person you have to lead us.”
My .02
CavScout
I didn’t rely on the MSM to tell me that Palin is just not someone I’d want as a presidential candidate. She was a pr stunt as a VP nominee, and she’s still a bad idea that won’t go away.
I am tired of having Ivy League presidents. The last four have all been from the ivy league. Honestly, I don’t want some “smart guy” or “rich kid” who sailed through college on scholorships or had parents who paid for it. I want that person who had to work hard and figure out how to go to school. Obama, who is no doubt an intellegent man, what has he really done with his (as one friend put it) fancy degree? He was a community organizer in a crappy neighborhood…that is still crappy. People made fun of Bush for being stupid, but hey he went to Harvard and had a fancy degree. Clinton and Bush I both Yale alums.
Then we get to Reagan…who went to Eureka College. Honestly I don’t think that any of those schools are much different. I would prefer a successful businessman without a degree than a highly educated person who has never worked outside government.
As far as Obama is concerned, the honymoon is over for me. But just because I have lost a lot of respect for Obama doesn’t change the fact that Palin is a shallow empty shell of an opportunistic politician. Thanks for the spell check UpNorth…
Spot on John……the left is already trying to tell Republicans who not to run in 2012. But people still want the Democrats to pick the Republican candidate, so we will get some wishy washy semi-conservative to lose another election…..
The whole writing on the hand at the TEA Party convention really did it for me with Sarah Palin. If you have to write on your hand to remember what are supposed be basic tenants of the conservative movement, then you really show you don’t have a clue what you are talking about.
I fear conservatives are becoming anti-intellectual as a movement. Somebody who can sit down and articulately discuss the values of limited government, a strong national defense, and personal liberty and responsibility is not something we should be afraid of. I don’t think Sarah Palin can get beyond spouting slogans of the movement. Its not an issue of education or having not gone to an ivy league school or education. As mentioned earlier in this thread, Ronald Reagan did not go to an Ivy League school. However Ronald Reagan could effectively articulate the ideas of the conservative movement and did in writings, speeches, and even in debates with other conservatives like William F. Buckley.
I’ve yet to see this from Sarah Palin.
Right on Operator Dan! As a leftward leaning person, I for one would welcome debate with rational, pragmatic conservatives because they do have some good ideas. Garrison Keillor said it right when he opined that Richard Nixon was the last Republican president with a sense of christian charity. Who’d have thought I’d look back longingly to Richard Nixon! Since then there has been nothing but increasingly hidebound, irrational reactionaries. Credit the perfection of Madison Avenue advertising techniques adopted by political operatives. And you hit the nail right on the head calling the current movement anti-intellectual (like a certain contributor to this site who pointed to the fact that it had snowed a few inches on his property in W. Virginia (?) to discredit the entire body of research pointing to global warming). I am sick of reactionaries who can only spout uproveable truisms and the talking points that happen to be in vogue, and have to write them down on their hand!!!. If you want to understand why the current anti-intellectual streak worries me, look no further than the Third Reich in the thirties. I would welcome a return of a civilized debate, but the current crop of FOX/Tea Party conservatives are orbiting out beyond Pluto somewhere.
…I would welcome a return of a civilized debate…
…right after you compared them to Nazi’s, hurrah! civilized debate is back
BTW Joe, they’ve found that Pluto seems to warming too, must all those conservatives out there….
must BE all those…
Instead of the headline, “Palin frightens left”, it should read, “Palin frightens thinking people”.
Exactly how do we know His Highness is an educated and articulate man? Have others been privy to his college transcript? Is his teleprompter for show only?
This is why TAH is my favorite (mil)blog. I like it even more than my own.
Just a Grunt said aloud what needed to be said about Palin: Being a voice for that large section of Americans who have no voice, and are always being dismissed by ruling and educated elites may be where she can best serve.
I’ll add: Provided she doesn’t become just another media type ala Limbaugh, Hannity, et al.
She CAN do good as an outsider/grassroots spokesperson.
Garrison Keillor, Joey? Really? A member of the Democratic-Farmer-Labor Party? The same party that gave us that esteemed Senator, Al Freakin Franken? An NPR hack? Geez, yeah Joey, we should certainly listen to a learned lefty like Garrison Keillor. It’s always worked out well for us when we let the left pick our candidate for us.
Now, then, Joey, let us address “hidebound, irrational reactionaries”. How about Biden, Fwank, Dodd, Van Jones, Karl Levin, Nancy Pelosi, Obama, Craig Decker(now that is really a hidebound, irrational reactionary for you) and the other 57 Dem Senators I didn’t mention?
And your “entire body of research pointing to global warming” seems to have been pretty much revealed to be a fraud, if you could bother yourself to read anything.
As for Palin, not that interested in her yet. But, it’s amazing how the left ties itself in knots every time she gets a mention in the Lame Stream Media.
As for the spell check, always happy to help out.
Operator Dan.
I dunno, but your appraisal of Palin’s speech seems to be lacking some perspective.
She may well be the proverbial empty suit. If so she’s not the first. And her words were her own. The issue might be whether she is an opportunist, but not because she didn’t wanna drift from the subject matter of interest to those she was speaking to.
You said: I fear conservatives are becoming anti-intellectual as a movement.
This is an interesting question. You may be on to something with that, but I don’t see how it applies to Palin?
Sorry guys, I like her and think she’s head and shoulders above the “O”. She’s the only reason I didn’t throw up in my mouth a little bit when I voted for Mac.
The only problem I have with her writing on her hand is I would suggest she use 3×5 cards instead. There is no shame in having notes to speak from and I think it’s pretty ballsy for the Teleprompter in Chief to give her shit about it.
Talk all you want to about her not being very smart. She ran the largest State in the Union until the endless bovine scatology lawsuits made it impossible for her to govern effectively, so she turned it over to the Lt Gov and saved her State a boatload of money. I don’t think she should have quit, but I respect her for making her own rules and ignoring the “establishment”.
Keep on beating on her, it goes over like a fart in a spacesuit with the middle America crowd and will drive conservatives to the polls in droves should she run.
@ROS … and, here we go. Really?! There are doubts that he’s intelligent? Then, why all the anti-intelligent rhetoric? Is he stupid, and unable to speak w/o a teleprompter? Or, is he the “educated elite” who’s only “claim to fame was the editor of the Hahvahd Law review?” … I don’t remember Bush walking into a room full of Dems and schooling them in an impromptu Q&A session … if that didn’t convince you that he is, at the very least, intelligent, then, the only thing I can think is that it really isn’t his intelligence you’re afraid of.
@ponsdorf … how does “anti-intellectual” *not* apply to Palin?! And, her fervent, ardent supporters? They tout anti-intellectualism as a badge of honor!!
Ugh.
CavScout said:how does “anti-intellectual” *not* apply to Palin?! And, her fervent, ardent supporters? They tout anti-intellectualism as a badge of honor!!
I disagree. I’d say they DO dislike smarmy pseudo-intellectuals, and maybe elitist snobs.
Mind you, I don’t count myself one of her ‘fervent, ardent’ (that’s redundant, BTW) supporters. I just don’t see/hear/read anything anti-intellectual coming from the
Tea Party folks.
I like Sarah Palin to an extent. She speaks plainly and has a better connection with people. So what if she writes notes on her hands. The liberal vision of her as a bumbling idiot is as askew as someone who sees her as perfect.
We will never have a perfect leader. All we can hope for is the right person at the right time. We have had that in the past: Truman, Regan, Eisenhower, etc… Unfortunately, I think that we don’t have the right person at the right time. We haven’t had the opportunity to vote for the best person in over twenty years.
I would rather get cussed out by Harry Truman than talked down to by O.
Bush walking into a room full of Dems and schooling them in an impromptu Q&A session
So the Repubs got schooled did they? I saw them ask questions he either dodged or lectured them on being bi-partisan (meaning you need to agree with me) Frankly, without the teleprompter in his Q&A he “sounded” decidedly partisan and showed he doesn’t do “off the cuff” very well. Palin wrote 7 words on her hand and did a 40 minute speech, not to shabby.
There’s nothing wrong with an intelligent leader so long as they come with a good measure of old fashioned common sense.
ponsdorf,
Ever since Palin bombed the Couric interview (which was entirely her fault) she has pushed this line that she is being persecuted by the media for being a simple-minded hockey mom and that is OK not to be able answer and articulate basic questions about foreign policy. She is, in essence, running on an anti-intellectual platform.
Palin is an empty suit, not different from Obama in her depth. I don’t want to replace one empty suit with another in 2012.
Operator Dan said:She is, in essence, running on an anti-intellectual platform.
You may be right? I’m kinda of taken with her lack of artifice though.
One thing for sure – no one elected President goes into office knowing it all. It’s the ones that think they have all the answers that are more frightening to me.
Joe; yeah the intellectuals have done such a marvelous job in running everything; haven’t they? The problem is people like you, who think they are intellectually superior to others and think you know best how we should live. That’s arrogance, not intellectual firepower. A degree in fine arts isn’t required to be able to run a business, or a country. Common sense is and I’m afraid that most of those “intellectuals” fall far short of having any. Also, those same “intellectuals” don’t have a fricken clue about what makes this country the greatest ever and aren’t interested in talking to people, but rather down to them. Current President is included in that group. You are not a left leaning person, Joe, you are a dyed in the wool communist. With that in mind, the rest of what you said doesn’t surprise me in the examples you give. Do you know what we call the DFL party up here in Minnesota? It’s not the Democrat-Farmer-Laborer party, it’s the Dumb-Fucking-Liberal party. How do I know this? Because I live in Minnesota, I have met Garrison the man-boy, I had met Wellstone several times (I didn’t agree with his politics, but I respected him as someone who did what they said) and have had to deal with the drolling moonbats constantly when in the Uptown area of Mpls. Franken even thought he was going to disturb my lunch one day at the State fair, when I was there working in the Veterans Service Information Center. He thought better of it when I gave him the facial expression that it would be better if he stayed away. There’s a difference between charity and handouts. Between charity and entitlements. Charity and theft. Government deciding that they are going to take away your money and give it to someone else isn’t charity, that’s government mandated theft. Me deciding that I want to give my money to a program of my choice is true charity, because it’s my decision, not yours. You want to claim the Christian mantle, Joe? Ok, which is better; giving a man a… Read more »
@ponsdorf … I fervently (and ardently) apologize for being redundant … 🙂
OT,
I have the greatest respect for the “every day hard working people” – I call them the fast-disappearing middle class. I guess I am one of them. And I am tired of them getting the shaft by the free market fundamentalist/Ronald Reagan/Milton Friedman believers. I am losing faith in Obama, but I do not see why, in principle, leaders you call a liberal elitists can not have the best interests of the middle class at heart. FDR was a patrician (liberal elitist?), but it’s clear he worked for the best inetersts of every day hard working people. Reagan talked the talk, but he was a wolf in sheeps clothing, he unleashed the forces of unfettered greed against the middle class, which he and the free market fundamentalists treated, and continue to treat, as an expendable resource to be exploited and ravaged. But he wrapped in a nice little bow of “Freedom! Choice! Liberty! Government’s the problem!”, and a lot of people (you?) bought into it. Now look where the middle class (your every day hard working people) stands, and where our country stands.
I dunno, Joe–when over 45 percent of my check goes to the government, I’d say they’re a problem.
Joey, did you pay any attention to the past 4 years? I mean, since your folks took over congress? Any clue at all, there pal? OldTrooper nailed you with the following, “You are not a left leaning person, Joe, you are a dyed in the wool communist.”. No answer for that, right? Keillor is a lefty dolt, but you trot him out as a reasoned voice in the debate over civility. There’s no civility with you and yours, it’s do as I/We say, and we can be civil.
You don’t believe in the free market, why is that, because socialism has worked out so well everywhere it’s tried? Yeah, we should adopt Cuba’s health care plan, along with Venezuela’s economic plan, and everything will be just loverly?
You don’t answer questions that anyone asks you, you just skip on to the next talking point you picked up at du, kos or MSDNC.
I had this whole response for Joe written up, but I might as well piss into the wind. I have more respect for beggars on the side of the road than people on welfare. At least the beggars are honest.
UpNorth,
Have YOU paid any attention to the last thirty years since this country fell under the thrall of Milton Friedman and Ronald Reagan? Look at all the graphs – our downhill slide started with Reagan.
So justplainjason,
A thrifty two-earner family has both parents lose their jobs in quick succession through no fault of their own, they lose their house, they need food and shelter, and you have more respect for beggars by the side of the road. I don’t understand your logic, or your selfishness. Hope you’re secure in your job – I hate to see you by the side of the road, hat in hand. Hey, it could happen.
Joe, try again. More like it started (economically) under FDR. And as far as pissing on the Constitution, it began under Woodrow Wilson. Try looking a little farther than your own “experience”, which seems to be painfully limited.
Joe,
Which graphs? The one showing taxes gowing up? Reagan cut them and prosperity ensued but leftists dubbed it the “decade of greed” what’d they call it during Clinton’s 90’s as the nation continued to prosper? GDP was gowing up, that’s a good graph, unemployment was half what it is now. In the last 30 years the cost of college has FAR outpaced inflation….must be all those Friedman types running universities….oh wait, they’re all lefties… In the last 30 years the price of gasoline has underpaced inflation….not run by lefties.
FDR was a patrician (liberal elitist?), but it’s clear he worked for the best inetersts of every day hard working people.
By doing what? Extending and deepening the great depression? Social inSecurity which creeps closer to insolvency (FDR also said SS should be completely privatized by the late 60’s too)
Old Tanker, Joey just looks at the graphs he wants to look at. He chooses to ignore the cost of college, unemployment, except when he chooses to parse something for his own ends, taxes going up, and the boom that was in place from the time of Reagan onward.
Joey, again, try addressing a single point that anyone has brought up. I know you can’t do it, but try. I have paid attention over the last thirty years, doing well, thank you. But, I’m not dependent on gubmint to take care of me from cradle to grave. Get away from the talking points, it’ll open your eyes, but I forget, you’re an idealogue.
How is it over there in the worker’s paradise?
Now, just to make it easy on ya, what’s the deficit today, what was it under Bush 43 and what was it under Reagan? Got a graph that covers that, from an independent source?
Hah! GDP grew! Big whoop! Give a meaningful statistic, like how real families are affected, not some abstract calculation. Real income for families now is about the same as 1997, and falling, while the top few percent have an ever bigger piece of the pie. Screw the GDP.
Here’s a graph for you, UpNorth. Reagan dug a big hole, Bush senior made it deeper, Clinton got us into the black, and W absoultly buried us. The republicans talk a good game, but when it comes to reality, a different story.
http://tinypic.com/view.php?pic=sgh9cn&s=4
Here’s a graph for you, Joe. Notice that the unemployment rate peaked at 9.7 in 1982 – the year after Reagan took office and never reached that point again – until this year.
Here’s another chart that doesn’t support your empty charges that wages have fallen to Clinton-era levels.
When you cling to unsubstantiated myths, without looking for yourself, you’re bound to look foolish.
Clinton didn’t get us into the black either – his surpluses were year-over-year. We were still in debt.
Joe, how am I being selfish? You always like to call people that, but I don’t think you understand what it means. First of all what you described doesn’t happen nearly as often as you believe. If fact I don’t know a single person that this has happened to. The thing is that people who work for what they have get back up. People on the side of the road have given up. People on welfare they never do anything or go anywhere…trust me I know I grew up around them.
I was always taught that you take care of your friends and family. Sometimes that means letting them hit rock bottom. I have never hit rock bottom but I have been close to standing on the side of the road with my hat in hand. So don’t fucking judge me joe.
Uh, did I mention GDP? I mentioned the amount owed by the government. “Real families”? Would the “real income for families” be impacted by the tax and spend policies of congress and this president? The Department of Commerce said that “personal income” increased $44.5B in December, and “disposable personal income” increased $45.9B in December, both increases amount to .4% increases. Private wage and salary disbursements increased $6.3B in December, $25.1B in November. So, how are increases decreases, Joey? Unless you intend to measure “real income” by going door to door, asking?
Joe, you can’t be serious in your analysis; can you? You have missed the point of what free markets are. You have your “greed” talking point as though no one on the left, especially the elitists/intellectuals, have greed in mind. Why do I need a so-called intellectual to look out for me, or have my best interests in mind? I hate to break it to you, but they don’t, no matter how hard you try and spin it. The only interest they have in me is control. They want to control me through big government. They are arrogant enough to think they know what’s best for me, when their version of what’s best for me is to listen to them and have them tell me what to do. I don’t need them to tell me what to do. I am part of your middle class, that you are so concerned about, and I would be doing better without the government intervention. You champion FDR, however, you haven’t really looked at what he accomplished on the society/economic front; have you? Many people believe the lie that he brought us out of the Great Depression with his policies, yet after careful review, even his own Treasury Secretary concluded all his spending did nothing but prolong the depression, same as with Obummer now. You confuse greed with ambition. Reagan wanted everyone to have the opportunity to reach whatever goal they set for themselves, whether it was higher education in order to get a better paying job, or taking risks with opening a new business, with either success or failure decided by the market. With success comes employment for others and more people working, all without the government in the way. Government isn’t the answer to our problems, government IS the problem. They can’t create jobs, except for government jobs, yet Obama and his “advisors” are all ball deep in Keynesian economics, which hasn’t worked….EVER. Ask Jimmah Carter how well it worked for him? Yeah, I’m sure you think that Reagan didn’t do sqaut, but when Reagan took office, there was double digit inflation,… Read more »
The CBO? You’re citing the CBO? Come on Joe, even you can do better than the CBO. And going by their numbers, which you happened to pick a graph that leaves off the Leftist in Chief’s number. SO, $400B is much worse than the $1.6Trillion deficit for this budget?
Holy shit John….you can’t go using all them facts and stuff!
Clinton’s “surplus’s” only came far down the road if we kept slashing military spending……what else did Clinton do?
Stop it, John–you’re just confusing him with your “wasis” facts.
I don’t have time or inclination to get into dueling graphs and the minutia of saving the country’s economy. I’ll say a few things and then bail. Right now the deck is stacked against regular families. Those that still have work, work twice as hard just treading water. They are nickeled and dimed to death on all sides. What the graphs don’t show is now most middle class families have to have two earners to maintain the style of living that a one earner family had 30 years ago. I fully believe what Elizabeth Warren, who would get my vote for president, says when she talks about the continuing destruction of the middle class, many of whom are not middle class any more, but in survival mode. Can’t afford college, can’t afford insurance, can barely afford a house. Who is on their side? You all trumpet abstract ideas like the first amendment rights of corporations, but which of you defend the humble families of this country who want nothing more than to raise a family and maybe hope things will be a little better tomorrow than today? Later…..
I don’t have time or inclination to get into dueling graphs and the minutia of saving the country’s economy.
You should have stopped right there and left. If you’re not interested in providing any proof for your outrageous claims, why even bring them up? We’re not interested in your gut-feelings. Either provide something substantive for your halfwit BS, or STFU.
BTW, it took me ten seconds to find those two charts – you don’t have ten seconds?
Joe: “I’ll say a few things and then bail.”
Yeah, that’s pretty much par for your course, Mister Seagull–swoop in, shit all over everything, then take off.