By Arturo Mora, Kansas City Star Midwest Voices columnist 2009
Palin presses the flesh
The adjectives to describe Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin's resignation are just too easy to come by, unless you’re one of her googlie-eyed followers who’ve drunk her Kool-Aid. Let’s start with: irresponsible, overambitious, megalomaniac, martyr, and of course, quitter.
The one Democrats are most frightened of, though, is brilliant politician. It’s extremely unlikely, but she may just be able to do the impossible and beat President Obama in the next election.
The Facebook statement explaining her decision, besides reflecting her usual poor command of English, is an obvious call to arms for the next election.
“I am now looking ahead and how we can advance this country together with our values of less government intervention, greater energy independence, stronger national security, and much-needed fiscal restraint. I hope you will join me. Now is the time to rebuild and help our nation achieve greatness!”
She continues with her usual attack on the press: “How sad that Washington and the media will never understand; it’s about country. And though it's honorable for countless others to leave their positions for a higher calling and without finishing a term, of course we know by now, for some reason a different standard applies for the decisions I make.”
The “higher calling” point might have some validity, if she had not said a day earlier, "Many just accept that lame duck status and they hit the road, they draw a paycheck."
To quit an executive governing position because you are bored with lame-duck status, or even if you don’t like the ineffectiveness of that status, is unconscionable.
Guess what governor? Lame-duck status inevitably comes with most executive positions, unless you’re defeated or resign. What would our states be like if all lame ducks quit once they’d decided not to run again? What if President George W. Bush had decided to quit once lame-duckness made him ineffective?
That’s not how government works in America. You serve out the full term, unless there’s a scandal or illness that forces you out. If you do otherwise because you don’t want to be a lame duck, you deserve only one title. Quitter.
Palin mentioned quitting for a "higher calling" (cue "Hail to the Chief," please), and that is not without precedent. Many have quit the Senate or governorships to run for President. And that can even be honorable, avoiding a situation where you don’t cheat the taxpayers of your state out of your full attention.
First, she blew that argument by talking about the lame duck thing. Second, it’s not a valid point to make when the "higher calling" is over three years away. No one, as far as I know, has ever quit an elected position that far out to run.
So that different standard she pre-assumes the press will make about this doesn’t apply here. Palin loves to use the press as her whipping boy, and play martyr. But the fact is the worse damage the press has ever done to her is airing her inane answers to fairly straightforward interview questions.
Mostly this all shows just how endeared she is with certain other press clippings, the ones about the adoring crowds she draws and how many Republicans view her as the Great Conservative Hope. Her statement shows an extraordinary megalomania. Only Palin can save the country!
It’s also risking an image as overambitious. If you think Hillary Clinton had trouble shaking that tag, watch it become glue on Palin.
The irony is that, as horrible a political move as this is, in the end Palin may be able to win all the marbles. Stranger things have happened, witness Obama’s victory.
The Republican base is so in love with her, they may just drive her to the nomination in 2012. If that happens, all bets are off. If the economy is still tanking, voters may just ignore everything else, and we will have President Sarah Palin in 2013.
Let’s just hope she doesn’t get bored about 2017 or 2018 and quit again.
Delicious
Digg
I think you're wrong Arturo.......
....The Republican base is so in love with her, they may just drive her to the nomination in 2012. If that happens, all bets are off. If the economy is still tanking, voters may just ignore everything else, and we will have President Sarah Palin in 2013.
In spite of the PDS blather being forwarded by Arturo's progressive bretheren, I do not see the same "love" for Palin in the GOP base that they do. My areas/spheres of influence numbers about 300 between 35 and 70 yrs old, the vast majority of whom (75% guess) are repubs. They see me (libertarian) as a whacky, fiscally conservative, liberal (how many see libertarians, anyway). I do not know a single one who supports Palin as presidential material. Many will defend her regarding PDS.....and do so regularly......but virtually none believe her to be a viable presidential candidate.
Frankly, that pleases most, including me.
Give Palin credit though for being the lightening rod for the reawakening of traditional "republican roots" political activism. It will be very interesting to see what evolves in the GOP over the next 15 months....a most critical period for the party.
Vegas2112 To answer your
Vegas2112
To answer your question of yesterday, John Kerry.
I'd much rather have someone
I'd much rather have someone in the White House that knows what it's like to meet a payroll or knows what happens to my business with a tax increase.
I don't care how many Ivy League titles he has behind his name. I am not impressed. They are all worthless to me if he has no clue as to how the country works and what makes it run.
HRW
which is exactly why he isn't qualified, plus the company he kept.
.
He went from academia to an organizer (agitator). He's never witnessed first hand what it took to run a business. When in the Illinois senate, he spent many of his votes as "present". People in power latched onto him because of his color and far-left politics and are now riding him in the WH.
.
I'm not a Palin supporter because I feel like she's been dirtied by the press, and don't feel she's the most qualified. I support Mitt Romney.
Classic Palin
Katie Couric: "What other Supreme Court decisions do you disagree with?"
Sarah Palin: "Well, let's see. There's --of course --in the great history of America rulings there have been rulings, there's never going to be absolute consensus by every American. And there are -- those issues, again, like Roe v Wade where I believe are best held on a state level and addressed there. So you know -- going through the history of America, there would be others but--"
Couric: "Can you think of any?"
Palin: "Well, I could think of -- of any again, that could be best dealt with on a more local level. Maybe I would take issue with. But you know, as mayor, and then as governor and even as a Vice President, if I'm so privileged to serve, wouldn't be in a position of changing those things but in supporting the law of the land as it reads today." --unable to name any Supreme Court decisions other than Roe v. Wade, CBS News interview, Oct. 1, 2008
seriously, twas
is that really the best you can do in defending Palin?
Perhaps I can settle your fears
Obama graduated from the best law school in the country and taught at perhaps the third-best law school in the country. Rather than go into a seven-figure income as one of the country's top lawyers he went to the community instead, then into the United States Senate. His life has been one of stunning achievement, without the advantage of wealthy parents.
It is of course impossible to find achievement of that sort in the curriculum vitae of Sarah Palin, whether academic, political, or societal.
My sentiments exactly:
but what scares me is that someone so devoid of any sort of positive qualifications and so obviously marked with a number of warning signs of incompetence is nonetheless capable of attracting support from a substantial number of Americans.
.
Oops, were you or weren't you talking about Obama?
ill-suited
You can excuse any individual aspect of Palin. She struggles to put together a coherent sentence, but some intelligent people are poor talkers. Her academic career was highly pedestrian, but some people are better than their academic record suggests. She's highly inexperienced, but experience isn't the same thing as competence. She seems to alienate the people she works with, but doing good work isn't the same thing as getting along with others. She struggles to run her own household, but some very competent people struggle with these things. The list goes on.
But then you ask yourself what is it about her that should make anyone excited for her to be president. Frankly, I can't think of a good answer. She isn't the intellectual leader of anything. Her perspective on most issues, when she even has an opinion, is total boilerplate conservatism that gives the impression of little more than regurgitation. Her primary "accomplishment" in Alaska was building the pipeline -- except that ground won't be broken on the pipeline for many years, if ever, due to legal holdups.
In short, she's shown no evidence of ability as an independent thinker, and her record of "leadership" suggests a temperament that's ill-suited to the presidency.
I won't speak for others, but what scares me is that someone so devoid of any sort of positive qualifications and so obviously marked with a number of warning signs of incompetence is nonetheless capable of attracting support from a substantial number of Americans. I'm just grateful that nowhere near a majority of Americans would ever be willing to vote for her after the thorough meat-grinder of a presidential election.
=========
Credit to Dave Stickler
And in reference to talking about Sarah Palin
Please note that substantial criticism is coming from mainstream Republicans, a significant amount from conservative Republicans, and most importantly from Alaskans themselves. Also please note that Ms. Palin is herself blogging vigorously, and clearly has expressed no desire to move from the spotlight, as long as it's an uncritical spotlight.