Palin Says She’ll Be Back

-


Wow. Palin ‘essentially’ implies that she’ll be back to challenge for the presidency in 2012, leaving a McCain aide “speechless.”
Why speechless? Well, the battle for 2008 isn’t exactly over.
ABC has the transcript out.
— Steve Clemons

Comments

46 comments on “Palin Says She’ll Be Back

  1. tanya says:

    Whatever happens to Sarah Palin after this election, I think it’s
    remarkable to have had the opportunity to watch such a blatant
    opportunist in full dudgeon – no respect, totally over-empowered
    and entitled without the brains and ability to go with it – she
    jumped in and has acted in the most narcissistic manner possible.
    It’s clear that she quickly lost respect for McCain and the office
    he’s running for – she’s a loose cannon on the campaign trail.
    Well, he picked her – let’s hope after Nov. 4th, that our nation
    doesn’t have to suffer for his sin. She ruthless and would
    undermine him in the presidency – and undermine the nation’s
    best interests as well, and we’ve had 8 years too much of that.

    Reply

  2. PissedOffAmerican says:

    November 1, 2008
    HEY PALIN: Time to say you’re sorry!
    By Shannyn Moore
    shannynmoore.wordpress.com
    Alaskans will stick up for Alaskans despite party. When it’s ten below and snowing sideways, you don’t check bumper stickers to see if you’ll help someone by the road. Walt Monegan and many other Alaskans have been thrown under McCain’s Straight Talk Express Bus. A bi-partisan team is now formally asking for an apology. The Branchflower Report found Sarah Palin did abuse her power, even though she apparently hasn’t read it. I will know life is back to normal when Republican Gail Phillips and I can get back to arguing about mining issues and I can keep rooting for Chancy Croft’s son Eric in his mayoral run. Right now, we are trying to salvage all the collateral damage caused by the McCain/Palin campaign.
    BI-PARTISAN CALL ON McCAIN CAMPAIGN FOR APOLOGY TO FORMER ALASKA PUBLIC SAFETY COMMISSIONER
    Campaign Attacks on Career Law Enforcement Office Called “Unconscionable”
    ANCHORAGE – Today a bi-partisan call was made on the McCain Campaign for an apology to former Public Safety Commissioner Walt Monegan. The bi-partisan call was made by former Republican Speaker of the House of Representatives Gail Phillips and former Senate President Chancy Croft. Both legislators expressed dismay at the negative characterizations made by McCain’s campaign staff that traveled to Alaska in September and October in an unsuccessful attempt to derail the Legislature’s bi-partisan “Troopergate” investigation. That investigation resulted in a report that was released, on a unanimous vote of the Alaska Legislature’s Legislative Council, on October 10th.
    Mr. Monegan, as conceded by Governor Palin in hiring him for the position, earned great respect throughout Alaska for his dedicated law enforcement work.
    Former Speaker Phillips offered the following statement about Mr. Monegan, a former U.S. Marine, widely-respected career police officer, Anchorage Police Chief and State Public Safety Commissioner: “It’s unconscionable that an outside campaign organization which had no knowledge of the history, background or understanding of an Alaskan issue would come to our State to destroy the reputation and life of a dedicated Alaskan public servant, Walt Monegan. Senator McCain’s attempt to insert his campaign into action taken by the Alaska Legislature was wrong and poorly thought out”.
    Former President Croft noted “Walt’s good reputation has become a casualty because of people who never met him, don’t live in Alaska and who valued political attack over honor. Gail and I are speaking for thousands of Alaskans of all political loyalties and we would like to help Walt get back his earned reputation for honesty and dedicated public service”.
    Here is their letter:
    Dear Senator McCain:
    We are writing because we believe an apology is owed from your campaign to Alaskans and our former Commissioner of Public Safety, Walt Monegan. As former legislative leaders of both major political parties in Alaska, we haven’t always agreed upon political issues. However, we adamantly agree that Mr. Monegan, who is well respected in Alaska by people of all party affiliations, is owed an apology. The attacks against Commissioner Monegan for his role in administering a personnel issue, now known statewide as “Troopergate”, were unwarranted and wrong. Mr. Monegan is a former U.S. Marine, a front-line police officer, was Chief of Police in Anchorage, Alaska’s largest city, served as our State’s Commissioner of Public Safety and served both Republicans and Democrats with professionalism and honor.
    This summer Governor Palin fired Mr. Monegan as Commissioner, which was within her purview. However, in July, the Legislature, through unanimous action by the bi-partisan Legislative Council, voted to investigate Commissioner Monegan’s termination and whether his refusal to fire Trooper Wooten played a role in his termination. The investigation had nothing to do with your campaign.
    After Governor Palin was named as your running mate, your campaign stepped into the fray. In an effort to discredit and stop the bi-partisan legislative investigation into whether or not Governor Palin acted improperly in seeking the termination of her former brother-in-law, Trooper Wooten, your campaign engaged in a near-daily course of personal attacks against Mr. Monegan and members of the legislature. It’s obvious to many of us that you probably were not aware of these attacks by your campaign committee; however, since the final responsibility is yours, we feel Mr. Monegan is owed an apology from you.
    In an effort to halt the bi-partisan investigation, your campaign staff tried to vilify Commissioner Monegan. Before Governor Palin was selected to your presidential ticket, she had agreed to the investigation; she publicly said it was justified and that she and her staff would cooperate with the investigation. She stated to the press that the public had a right to be concerned whether or not her administration may have placed improper pressure on the State Department of Public Safety to fire her former brother-in-law.
    Following Governor Palin’s selection as your running mate, your campaign sent staff to Alaska to try to stop the investigation that Governor Palin had previously agreed to. Your campaign staff accused the legislative action as partisan in spite of the fact that the unanimous vote of the Legislative Council was bi-partisan.
    Your campaign accused Mr. Monegan of being a “rogue”, of being insubordinate and other defamatory statements. To justify your involvement in this Alaskan issue and the Governor’s termination of Commissioner Monegan, your campaign continually changed the excuses for his termination. The various and changing excuses given by your campaign speaks clearly to the lack of credibility in its involvement.
    Despite your campaign’s efforts to stop the investigation in court, and by public pressure, the investigation was recently completed. On October 10th the investigative report was released and the independent investigator, Steve Branchflower, concluded that the Governor had violated the State’s Executive Ethics statute by pressuring for the termination of Mr. Wooten from his position as an Alaskan State Trooper. The investigation also found that one of the probable reasons Commissioner Monegan was terminated was his refusal to fire the Governor’s former brother-in-law.
    We acknowledge the authority the Governor has for terminating Commissioners; however, your campaign’s interference into this State matter and attempts to discredit Commissioner Monegan for campaign purposes is very troubling. Both the vilification of Mr. Monegan and the attempts by your campaign to stop the investigation were wrong.
    We respectfully request an apology from your campaign to Mr. Monegan. He is a good man who has put his life on the line for Alaskans many times and he deserves better treatment from you and your campaign. Not only have the personal attacks from your campaign deeply affected and hurt the Monegan family, but also the people of Alaska who care and respect Mr. Monegan.
    Sincerely,
    Gail Phillips Former Speaker of the Alaska House of Representatives
    Chancy Croft Former President of the Alaska State Senate
    http://alaskareport.com/news98/x61725_hey_palin_9852361.htm

    Reply

  3. WigWag says:

    Dan Kervick may be right. In 2012 the religious right may be facing its Waterloo. And no doubt they will fight to survive. But if they select Palin or Huckabee to be their champion, their goose is cooked.
    The Republicans (and the Democrats too) always nominate the candidate who was one of the top two fundraisers during the primary season. During this primary season, despite the fact that McCain was roundly criticized for doing a poor job at fundraising, he raised more than any Republican candidate other than Romney. He raised more than Giuliani and he raised more than Ron Paul (despite Ron Paul’s success at generating funds on the internet.) His roster of bundlers included Henry Kravis (KKR) and Steve Schwartzman (Blackstone Group), John Thain (Merrill Lynch) as well as senior executives at Credit Suisse, JP Morgan Chase, Morgan Stanley and even Goldman Sachs (which is generally viewed as a Democratic leaning firm). None of this money will be available to Palin. One of McCain’s biggest donors (and bundlers) during the primary season was John Hess (his father, Leon Hess was the former owner of the NY Jets and CEO of Hess Oil). There is no way that he will ever support Palin.
    Palin can raise all the money she wants to from talk radio listeners, right wing churches and the rest of the “hard cultural right network.” But it won’t be enough to win her the nomination. Sure it will be enough to provide fodder for the Anderson Cooper’s and Chris Matthew’s of the world. But that’s entertainment; it has little to do with reality. They will give a Palin Campaign plenty of free publicity just like they did for Huckabee; but it’s just programming like American Idol or Dancing with the Stars. It is largely irrelevant to who gets the nomination.
    One other small disagreement I have with Dan Kervick is his statement “and they will use a combination of web, media and church-based fund-raising tools to do an end run around the money men.” I don’t doubt that they may try, but it won’t work. The “money men” always prevail. Always. In our system, doing an end run around them is not possible. If you don’t believe it, ask yourself, what’s Barack Obama’s biggest asset in this election? It’s not his eloquence (as articulate as he may be), and it’s not even the public’s hatred of George Bush (as well deserved as that is). It’s that the “money men” are on Barack Obama’s side; big time. Through Monday of this week, Obama has raised $639 million to McCain’s $360 million (which includes $80 million in public funds). Sure the little donor has been energized by Obama. But go to Open Secrets and check it out for yourself. Why did Obama raise more than $150 million in September (his best month ever)? The answer is simple. Hillary Clinton’s major donors finally acquiesced and started donating to Obama big time.
    When it comes to politics, it’s always about the money. Palin, Huckabee and candidates like them are great for cable TV ratings, but they never stand a chance.

    Reply

  4. rich says:

    wigwag,
    Serious? No one said anything about serious. But Palin will attract cash. As long as she can turn out the base and catapult the propaganda as proficiently as Ronald Reagan, she won’t be going away. She won’t be effective, but she’s too useful to disappear.

    Reply

  5. PissedOffAmerican says:

    Wednesday of last week Palin publically stated she had no problem with her medical records being released. Sunday, her campaign spokesman said the records would be released “early in the week”. Today is Friday. No records. It is obvious that the Palin people are running the clock out with promises that have no substance or honest intent. What are they hiding?

    Reply

  6. questions says:

    When I read Jane Mayer’s piece on Palin in Alaska, I came away with the distinct impression that Kristol et al were hot for her rather than impressed with her outsized intellect. In four years, she’ll be four years older, four years more wrinkled, and still largely ignorant of the world. She had a hard time in college with a gut major so she’s not likely to have an easy time getting the equivalent of a doctorate in internation relations and domestic politics. She’ll lack gravitas, she’ll be a little more shopworn, and she’ll still have extreme right wing views. Meanwhile, the whole country’s political scene will have shifted under Obama. If he lives up to his promise (see Rachel Maddow’s interview with him — Huff Po has a link), government may actually function somewhat better, there might be a coherent response to Afghanistan and other trouble spots, and we might have a rational set of domestic policies as well. If any of this comes true, Palin’s entire “argument” about takin’ on the big boys will be irrelevant. Here’s to hopey-changin’!
    (Have to admit, though, my favorite joke is Palin/Plumber 2011.)
    Republican politics will likely need to reinvent itself by shifting from the base-courting strategy, much as the Dems did via Clinton and Obama.
    (Despite Obama’s suggesting that he’ll have a bipartisan admin, I’m still not entirely convinced that partisan concerns will be absent from cabinet appointments. But I’ve been wrong on things like this before….And of course he has to win the election first!!)

    Reply

  7. Mr.Murder says:

    Thought I’d chime in with this take on the gaffe. This is her Spinal Tap moment.
    It could win her a swing state.
    “Hollo, Cleveland!”

    Reply

  8. aan missed says:

    After the election Sarah Palin will probably have the same credibility problem that Dan Quayle had after BushI lost to Clinton. She’ll probably get a job in Hollywood with a company producing laugh tracks for television sit-coms.

    Reply

  9. annjell says:

    Palin’s finished on the national circuit. For one, she can’t be trusted. The famous republican rule, “Thou shall not speak ill of another republican.” I don’t think it will sit well with taking down another republican.
    Another thing, she has a shady past, witchdoctors will not sit well with the christian right.
    And last, her and her husbands involvement in the Alaska’s Independence Party.
    When the election is over, the truth and nothing but the truth will come out. Example, the money paid to Todd Palin, to leave his business while traveling on the campaign.

    Reply

  10. Dan Kervick says:

    I think Palin has more of a shot to make a serious play for the nomination in 2012 than WigWag does.
    2012 is going to be the Alamo for the religious right in America. This election has blown open a long-submerged fissure between the religious right and the business class, a fissure that was first seriously exposed with the Schiavo case. The evangelicals see their foothold on legitimate, high-level power in the US political system slipping away, and are going to go into full rapture-jihad mode to hold onto it. Yes the business community will want nothing to do with her and will not support her. But Palin can run an insurgent campaign, and reach out to the vast hard cultural right network through the churches and the alt-right media – the same network that is leading a depressingly effective battle against Prop 8 in California right now. Think of it as Ron Paul on collection plate steroids. The far right is a populist movement, not a corporate one. If Palin wants their nod she can probably get it. And they will use a combination of web, media and church-based fund-raising tools to do an end run around the money men.
    It’s going to be Armageddon on the right.

    Reply

  11. bangzoom14 says:

    Listening to Sarah Palin in this video and watching her over the past eight weeks or so has been quite an experience. She’s like one of those crazy drivers who steps on the gas and doesn’t pay any attention to any yield signs, caution signs or rules of the road. It’s all about her and where she’s going. Well hopefully in 5 days the American people will be giving her a new direction. And Sarah, if your listening, when you get back up to Alaska, stay there.. Your fifteen minutes is just about up.

    Reply

  12. WigWag says:

    Sarah Palin is a flash in the pan. After McCain loses she will fade into obscurity. The idea that she can make a serious presidential run in 2012 (if McCain loses or if he wins and gets sick or dies) is ludicrous.
    Running a serious presidential campaign takes tens of millions of dollars. Even John McCain, who was a terrible fundraiser during primary season, raised well in excess of ten million dollars in the race to secure the nomination. This doesn’t count many millions more raised by his donors to pay for the Republican National Convention.
    Like Clinton and Obama, McCain raised a significant portion of this money in New York from the banking community, the hedge fund community and the rest of Wall Street. Democrats also raise a significant portion of money from the plaintiff bar, from high tech industries (despite Meg Whitman and Carly Fiorina who are exceptions)and from the entertainment industry. Republicans (including McCain) raise many millions of dollars from oil, gas and coal interests.
    Sarah Palin will have no success raising money from the financial industry and if we are to believe that she stood up to the oil companies, you can bet they won’t be supporting her campaign either. The bottom line is that Palin’s ability to raise enough money to secure the Republican nomination in 2012 is nonexistent. At best, if she runs at all, she will be another Huckabee; a media created sensation who at best comes in third or fourth.
    My guess is that in 2012 the Republican nominee, if he wants it, will be Jeb Bush. If Bush decides to wait until 2016 (he was born in 1953 so he will only be 63 years old) then Romney will be the nominee. Either Bush or Romney can raise tens of millions in a heart beat (and Romney has plenty of his own). Against either one, Sarah Palin doesn’t stand a chance.
    It’s true that Palin does represent a significant group within the Republican Party; but it’s a group that doesn’t really count. Pro-life, social conservatives are nothing but lackeys for the people that really count in the Republican Party; the business elite. This group considers people like Sarah Palin to be nothing but useful idiots. The chance that social conservatives will prevail to nominate one of their own is effectively zero.
    Bye bye, Sarah!

    Reply

  13. DonS says:

    In this link, note a Palin lisp. She is very tired, very medicated, missing a tooth(as my wife suggests) or all. Not that any is a sin, but it makes one wonder.
    http://thinkprogress.org/2008/10/30/palin-vote-stevens/

    Reply

  14. Spunkmeyer says:

    How did that 1996 primary campaign go for Dan Quayle? I would
    consider Huckabee a greater threat to the Democrats in the next
    election than Palin. Romney too.

    Reply

  15. chris says:

    I hope that we see some serious coverage of Palin’s speaking-in-tongues—witch-obsessed church and her radical scessesionist party links (via Todd “Zuul” Palin) before 2012.
    Surely those secessionists have burned a few copies of the Stars and Stripes during their ectatic/gothic “Visions of Independence” ceremonies!
    I’d also be interested in what Palin’s strategy is for the “End Times”… these unfortunate events must surely occur if Obama were elected.
    BTW, what is John McCain’s position on the “end-of-days?” (and even evolution for that matter… asking reltively little of the non-Faux media).
    The liberal bias in the main-stream media really is disgraceful.
    By 2012 I predict that the Republican party evolves into a small and stupid party… herds of cows (they call themselves bulls) lead by by a few rich guys forever advocating tax breaks for the rich.

    Reply

  16. DonS says:

    daCascadian, thanks for info. I guess I had heard it but didn’t connect the dots.
    Question might be, how favorably would Palin be regarded in run for special election while still in first term as governor? Whether and if the state Repub apparatus would nominate her, or would she run as an independent/maverick anyhow?
    She was plucked out of obscurity for this VP run. Just how many times can one substitute a lightening strike for a resume or, in the case of the voters, mistake it for a qualification?

    Reply

  17. DonS says:

    daCascadian, thanks for info. I guess I had heard it but didn’t connect the dots.
    Question might be, how favorably would Palin be regarded in run for special election while still in first term as governor? Whether and if the state Repub apparatus would nominate her, or would she run as an independent/maverick anyhow?
    She was plucked out of obscurity for this VP run. Just how many times can one substitute a lightening strike for a resume or, in the case of the voters, mistake it for a qualification?

    Reply

  18. Florestan says:

    Bring her on! She’s the perfect Neocon detritus. False positive
    personality narrative all dressed up in clothes that aren’t her own.
    She’ll study hard but I suspect she’s no Ronald Reagan, whatever
    THAT was.

    Reply

  19. carol says:

    Sarah Palin does not have any credibility anymore,
    she has had her day in the sun….why would this country even entertain the idea of this woman running for President???
    After the despicable campaign she has run with McCain you would think she would never have the nerve to show her face again.
    The whole campaign is more like a travelling comedy show…Country singers and now Joe the plumber, what other fools are they going to bring on stage next!!!
    We have had enough of those two to last a lifetime and next week can’t come quick enough.

    Reply

  20. daCascadian says:

    DonS >”…Anyone know if the Alaska Governor can nominate oneself to fill a Senate vacancy, or what the process is?”
    The answer has been posted in several places since Stevens was convicted. Due to a recent change in state law (because a recent governor (R natch) appointed his daughter to the Senate) there must be a special election to fill the empty seat if Stevens resigns or is tossed out of the Senate.
    Of course Sara could run in said election but…
    (and once again your captchaware doesn`t have a clue what it is actually displaying – what crapware)
    “…it`s the end of the world as we know it and I feel fine…” – REM

    Reply

  21. Mr.Murder says:

    The US-Arab relations conference, on CSpan2 today, has been something that TWN should really utilize to expand the conversation on creating further business and diplomatic contacts across the world.
    Many businesses are sponsoring this event as well, mindful of the ability to try and recruit bright able young persons for doing business world wide.
    Syria’s Amb. to the US spoke early, he blistered the recent helicopter assault on his country as a way of trying to influence elections. Agreed.
    Though he pointed out how occupations always inspire resistance, he left out his own country’s complex relationship with its sister state Lebanon. He did of course mention Israel/Palestine and America/Iraq. They appear to be western colonies at this time.
    Final note, if Obama really wants to pummel McCain about Iraq he can note the country was also supposed to have been founded on the flat tax deregulation principles of the neocons and it is left awash in corruption.
    It probably isn’t diplomatically tactful to do that at this time.
    Meanwhile, Palin probably takes over for Sen.Ted sometime soon, using the clout she gained from campaigning to finance the run at one state where her approval ratings are still past the national GOP low water mark threshold.

    Reply

  22. Dan Kervick says:

    Palin is not popular with the country at large. But she is extremely popular among a substantial minority of right-wing, culturally conservative and religiously conservative voters in some parts of the country. Wherever she goes, those voters turn out for her rallies and treat her like a superstar. From her perspective inside that right-wing bubble, the country is awash in Sarah-mania, a phenomenon that she assumes would be sweeping across the entire country if she weren’t held back by the albatross of that dowdy old John McCain and his stupid campaign.
    No wonder she’s thinking big thoughts for 2012.

    Reply

  23. Tintin says:

    Whether Palin returns all depends on how the world turns…and
    Americans’ attitudes with it. I remember the 1970s when Reagan
    seemed like an extreme longshot. Now he sits next to hot dogs,
    apple pie, and Chevrolet.
    I fervently hope she doesn’t return. She is all the things POA says
    she is…and much more. There is nothing to commend her other
    than wink and a smile. Nothing. But in America, under the right
    circumstances, that may be enough.

    Reply

  24. DonS says:

    “. . . chances are Sarah Palin will nominate herself to the Senate . . . It won’t be too bad if that were to happen, at least next time she will know a little bit more about the US and the World.”
    Then we’ll be faced with a slightly less ignorant, right wing creationist, environment raping, plastic, vindictive, whackjob instead of a totally ignorant one. Great.
    Anyone know if the Alaska Governor can nominate oneself to fill a Senate vacancy, or what the process is?

    Reply

  25. Ajaz says:

    If Senator Ted Stevens of Alaska wins his Senate seat by a stroke of luck, he is then likely to be kicked out by the Senate, chances are Sarah Palin will nominate herself to the Senate seat to build her credentials for a future run.
    It won’t be too bad if that were to happen, at least next time she will know a little bit more about the US and the World.

    Reply

  26. PeterG says:

    The Republican party will have to change in order to attract mainstream Americans. Many ‘mainstream’ Republicans would not support Sarah Palin. See, e.g., Eric Margolis’s piece “Rogue Republican”, for instance: http://www.ericmargolis.com/political_commentaries/rogue–republican.aspx

    Reply

  27. Bethie says:

    Well, I am not so sure that she will be back. Palin coupled with Stevens has once again made Alaska the laughing stock of the nation. For all of her talk of cleaning up the state we find out that she continues business as usual, or worse. I think that the Steven’s election will tell us a lot about the mood up there. People who are being forced to moving out of rural areas because of the prohibative cost of fuel will remember that she professes to be the “energy czarina”. I think that Sarah will soon be hitting the hunting trails much more fequently. She may just need that moose meat to feed the family. And having the public hillbilly wedding that may still have enought of a “freakshow” appeal to the masses that it gets traction on the entertainment shows, may just be the final nail in her political coffin. I think that the public is much too fickle to put up with Alaskan Idol Sarah after the election.

    Reply

  28. PissedOffAmerican says:

    Palin has been scrutinized in a manner she never imagined due to her national exposure. Many Alaskan’s who once supported her are now pissed off at McCain’s invasion of slimeball shysters sent to Alaska to mettle in Troopergate. The largest newspaper in Alaska, The Anchorage Daily News, has endorsed Obama. The Branchflower report found she abused her power, and an ongoing investigation is likely to arrive at the same conclusion. There are questions about the circumstances involved in the construction of her house that parrallel the circumstances that Stevens was indicted for.
    Its fairly obvious this woman is a vindictive bitch who used her power to launch a personal vendetta, has exhibited a propensity for cronyism, has engaged in illegal, unethical, and corrupt practices while in office, and is a pathological liar.
    You bet she’ll be back, she is a model member of the modern GOP. She has all the traits of a successful Washington politico.

    Reply

  29. rich says:

    McCain’s failing campaign is John McCain’s responsibility. Not Sarah Palin’s.
    Totally agree with Cycledoc, though. Sarah Palin is not going to go away. She’s too useful. It may take some time, but as with Reagan, she’ll be back. Elizabeth Dole, though, won’t be heard from again. You can’t accuse your opponent of being a faithless devil in North Carolina without some backlash from the non-Baptist denominations. Anybody else catch that ad?
    Cycledoc’s right. Palin was chosen because she fit the long-proven Republican model, and because she could adeptly carry out the Reagan method. Tell the Big Lie; never admit contrary facts. Embody a culturally reassuring stereotype, be optimistic, and signal the base. Find a scapegoat. In place of Big Brother, deploy Big Mother. Reagan’s deceptively avuncular demeanor was the Big Grand-dad version.
    Palin’s too useful to ostracize, and political observers who’ve followed Nixon, Atwater, Reagan and Rove know it. She catapults the propaganda very effectively. She’ll just bide her time and folks’ll forget about her wardrobe, her tussle with those silly laws, etc. Just like George Bush’s previous track record and Ronald Reagan’s outside the mainstream ideology.
    Dont’ get me wrong: Palin’s anathema to everything I believe and to common sense. But like Dick Cheney and Henry Kissinger, the deepest flaws and most unforgiveable sins just won’t matter as long as she marches in lockstep with corporate Republicans and pushes the Party line on wedge issues and self-interest. To me, she has little to offer.
    But what’s interesting about her is rejecting Ted Stevens-style corruption while allying herself with core Republican / corporate interests. The tide of history may wash her out of the picture, she may fail because people can, finally, see through this sh!t. But she won’t go away. John McCain’s ‘legacy’, though, has been irreparably harmed by his campaign tactics and sense of entitlement. I can take the word of those who know him if they say he’s a good man. But his tactics do not befit a man of character, and he has no one to blame but himself.
    One good example, from Meet the Press last week, I think: McCain was saying, “My friends, you have a choice to make, and the difference between Barack Obama and myself is so stark” . . . that it’s like black and white. How could you not pick me, he was saying. It’s so obvous, the difference between is black and white. Seriously. The only thing he didn’t do was come right out and say it. So let’s not put this on Sarah Palin. Everybody knows voters vote based on the Presidential nominee—not the VeeP. Not a good pick, but the rest of his campaign decisions and platform have been utter crap. That’s John McCain’s responsibility.

    Reply

  30. Cycledoc says:

    Over the years I’ve learned never to discount anything. Consider the Reagan presidency: She’s an attractive package; malleable; good public presence; reads scripts well; feckless; unaware;true believer.
    I’d like to think she will disappear into the dustbins of the evangelical movement but who knows?

    Reply

  31. Robert Morrow says:

    well, VP Palin could always run against incumbent president John McCain.
    Now wouldn’t that be FUN?

    Reply

  32. ginnyhall says:

    Whatever the press takes and runs with comments from Ms. Palin well,it is amazingly in-factual. Sara Palin never said anything about 2012 and this is more of the media trying to make up a story that isn’t there. She was speaking regarding the current election. The press would put innuendo into anything she didn’t say because that is how bad the reporting is. Simply bad journalisim of pundits gone crazy, like girls gone wild. There are no trustworthy factual media sources, similar to no trustworthy bankers or politicians in America today. It’s all opinion, bunk, or selling air.

    Reply

  33. annjell says:

    Wow, this is just too funny. I am having fun with this.
    Did John McCain feel that she would be loyal to him, in light of her history of taking out/down other republicans?
    That’s what he gets, thinking he’s the Mack Daddy! Did he honestly think he could control this young 44-year-old?
    BTW, who does she think she is? Does she honestly think she would matter in 2012? She is not Madonna, Celine, Cher, Oprah. Heck, she’s not even Brittany or Paris.
    I’m glad she’s going away. Listening to her is irritating – this would be like listening to Rosanne talk all day. And I happen to like Rosanne Barr.
    I would love to see her take Elizabeth Hasselback to Alaska with her. They both have the same IQ.

    Reply

  34. Carroll says:

    Palin could be back…every Halloween like Jason the slasher.
    On to more serious business…there is a new site…undertheinfluence.nationaljournal.com that is covering all the DC lobbying activity. Should be an interesting daily read.
    Even more interesting is they have the pdf of Obama’s plan to curb lobbying:
    http://undertheinfluence.nationaljournal.com/Obama%20Management%20Agenda%20%2809-08%29.pdf
    If he can do what this outlines he will be the greatest president in modern US history…SWAT team and all.

    Reply

  35. annjell says:

    It’s sad that the repubs have to stoop to such level to revive/rally their base.
    Sarah Palin, in fact, got a D in macroeconomics.
    She attended 4 different junior colleges – why? was she put on academic probation?
    She boasts of a journalism degree. Did she really attain her degree (from the community college)? I notice she plagarized a part of Ronald Reagan’s inaugural speech without giving credit “sometimes government isn’t the solution to our problem, sometimes govenment is the problem.”
    she quote people as a matter of fact, when truth is, it’s not fact. Example, Dick Cheney was duck hunting. Fact, he was quail hunting. Quail is migratory birds.
    The moral of this whole thing is, Sarah Palin has probably jinxed the entire campaign. Her dealing with the witchdoctor Rev. Muthee. I kid you not, people attending rallies have gotten injured (such as trips and falls), attendees have gotten flat tires, there has been so many things happening. It reminds me of the so-called curse that affecting this years Dancing With the Stars.

    Reply

  36. Linda says:

    I posted a couple weeks ago a link to an excellent 5 page article by Jane Mayer in “The New Yorker” about how Palin was chosen as VP and how she came to the attention of some of the top conservative intellectuals. Some of them still like and support her, and others have been turned off.
    The article is extremely interesting and very amusing. Here’s the link again: http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2008/10/27/081027fa_fact_mayer
    I have no doubt that, if nothing goes wrong in Alaska and she is re-elected as Governor, she’ll be back in 2012.

    Reply

  37. joel hanes says:

    > Well, the battle for 2008 isn’t exactly over.
    Dude. It is _so_ over.

    Reply

  38. daCascadian says:

    Sara seems to be forgetting about a few little “issues” back up north in the frozen wonderland she is (currently) governor of.
    And folks seem to be missing the most likely impact of an Obama win on Tuesday. BIG change in D.C. and the way things are perceived after his four years in office (asssuming he makes it of course).
    I think Ms Palin is going to be living in world she can`t imagine, at least not yet. One where her “song & dance” isn`t worth anything.
    Such hubris. Pride goeth before the fall to quote some famous writing.
    “What gets us into trouble is not what we don’t know, it’s what we know for sure that just ain’t so.” – Mark Twain

    Reply

  39. Bill R. says:

    Palin is a good marker for what the status of the Republican party is. She just threw McCain under the bus and most Rs probably congratulate her. And the vacuousness and the flippant extremism and anti-intellectualism is right where the Republican party is.
    Please note that Chris Shays threw McCain under the bus today saying he deserved to lose.

    Reply

  40. chophouse says:

    Palin will be nothing but a bad memory within 6 months. Her 15 minutes are about up.

    Reply

  41. ... says:

    more negative innuendo from palin.. who could have imagined… if you haven’t read the transcript – save yourself the agony… if anyone needs a teleprompter it is her, as she is unable to string a straight sentence together without being negative throughout..

    Reply

  42. Dan Kervick says:

    It’s even worse. There is a lot of talk out there in right-wing Republican circles that maybe a McCain loss wouldn’t be such a bad thing. It would just be the sort of necessary bloodletting that is needed to “re-focus” them on their crazy right-wing message and to prepare for a re-capture in 2012.
    Palin basically just gave boost to that that line of thinking. She is winking a message to her supporters: “Why get stuck with John McCain for eight years when you can just take a four-year pit stop and then have me?”

    Reply

Add your comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *