Sarah Palin vs. the "Elite" Republicans - Comments Page 2

Anti-Palin Republican "elites" ain't really so elite.

Syndicated conservative columnist Kathleen Parker, of whom I have sometimes been a fan, made waves in the 2008 election with her vigorous distaste for Sarah Palin. She went so far as to call on her to drop off the ticket because she was supposedly so ill-qualified.…
Read comments below, or read this article from the beginning.

Article comments

— go to most recent comments
  • 26 - Al Barger

    Nov 14, 2008 at 2:03 pm

    Dreadful, there were certainly women who have served more time in public office, but warming a chair is not the same thing as being qualified. Hutchinson is older and has been in the senate for awhile, but what has she ever actually accomplished?

    Palin was not picked just because she's a woman. Gender was a plus, but there were several other obvious reasons to pick her besides her plumbing. The reformer credentials, opposing corruption even within her own party - that was highly important to her selection. Plus, she's gotten more stuff actually done - particularly the big pipeline deal - than I've seen out of any other women or most of the men that McCain could have chosen.

    She might reasonably be argued to be a little green yet, but definitely at least as qualified for the job as any other Republican woman - or any but maybe, possibly a couple of men.

  • 27 - Baronius

    Nov 14, 2008 at 3:03 pm

    Lisa, I didn't use the word jealousy either. I don't think it's the right word at all.

    But to describe someone as far inferior in nearly every way to everyone, that's pretty strong stuff. I think about Joe Biden: I don't respect much about him, but he's eloquent and probably a good father, and he got over a stutter which is a pretty tough thing to do.

  • 28 - Lisa Solod Warren

    Nov 14, 2008 at 4:25 pm

    Baronius

    She's supremely ordinary.... is my point. Read the NYer piece on her a couple of weeks ago. If whe weren't so pretty and hadn't charmed the pants off a couple of influential conservative men (mainly Kristol) she never would have been pushed for the job. She's a lightweight and Parker and Noonan and others called it right. You may not respect Biden's opinions but he isn't a lightweight. Palin is very ambitious. That may be what gets her farther. Other than that.....

  • 29 - Al Barger

    Nov 14, 2008 at 4:34 pm

    "Eloquent" as regards Joe Biden means merely that he's a good BSer and can keep making sentences and sounding confident even when he's talking gibberish or saying things that flatly aren't true. Biden is totally a lightweight. I can't see where he's ever, ever accomplished anything except warming a senate chair.

    Sister Sarah is ordinary in some ways, with her upbringing and working class history - but she's extraordinary in other ways. No dumbass could have come up like she did and got that pipeline deal done.

    And Miss Lisa, you start to sound like a jealous female when you go on and on about her charming pants off. She's done a lot more than be charming.

  • 30 - Dr Dreadful

    Nov 14, 2008 at 4:41 pm

    Al, you have a point in that the vice-presidency involves little more than chair-warming. All Palin would have had to have done (oy! what a convoluted tense!) was to sit around DC, go and attend a few things, and say "what he said, you betcha!" when asked about her opinion of McCain's latest policy decision. So yes, in that respect she was qualified.

    However, ideally you also want someone with a little political nous who is also experienced enough to act as a sounding board and to advise and challenge you on your decisions. That, as Obama explained it, was the reason why he chose Biden.

    With that in mind, Hutchinson was one of the women I was thinking of, along with Carly Fiorina, Condoleeza Rice, Liddy Dole*, Olympia Snowe, Susan Collins, Susan Eisenhower and others.


    * Although admittedly the name Dole doesn't have a good track record when it comes to tilts at the White House.

  • 31 - zingzing

    Nov 14, 2008 at 4:56 pm

    seeing as how she very quickly became a poison within his campaign, she was obviously the wrong choice. she allowed herself to be completely destroyed by the media, and put up only a feeble, yet shrill, fight against it. she may have done well in alaska, but in the national spotlight, she proved to be little more than a little folksy charm and a couple facial tics.

    i would bet good money that if mccain had it to do all over again, he'd stay the hell away from palin.

  • 32 - Al Barger

    Nov 14, 2008 at 5:06 pm

    Oh Doc Dreadful, Vice-President Olympia Snowe or Liddy Dole - puh-lease. What big, boring piles of nothingness. And it's not like Palin wouldn't challenge him. She's not the quiet and submissive type.

    Zing- Who was poison within what campaign? I'd say that she pretty well pissed off the right people, worthless political operatives and the opposition. The carping from supposed anonymous McCain sources is just trying to pawn off blame for a bad election on the vice-presidential candidate. This would be nonsense in almost any campaign - and especially so in this one. Palin was WAY the most popular thing that McCain did.

  • 33 - Baronius

    Nov 14, 2008 at 5:09 pm

    Dread - Dole is over 70. McCain needed a younger VP nominee. Snowe and Collins are pro-choice. They wouldn't have been accepted by the conservative base. All three are in the Senate, and McCain had good reason to avoid picking a fellow senator.

    Eisenhower and Fiorina don't meet my criteria of experience. And considering that McCain was trying to avoid association with Bush, Rice wasn't an option.

  • 34 - zingzing

    Nov 14, 2008 at 5:12 pm

    among a certain group of republicans, there certainly was a groundswell of approval for mccain when he nominated palin. that lasted about two weeks. then the story became what a nutter she was. her anti-literature campaign, be it true or not, became a bigger story than mccain. her wolf hunting activities got more print than mccain's years of torture.

    she certainly was the "most popular" of the two. but for all the wrong reasons. and when your vp nominee's crazy antics overtakes your presidential candidate in terms of print space, you've got a bad, bad problem.

  • 35 - Baronius

    Nov 14, 2008 at 5:14 pm

    Lisa, Al's got you there. You think an accusation of jealousy is sexist, but you say that Palin "charmed the pants off" people. No one would say that about Biden - ACK! I just got the mental picture of Biden charming the pants off of someone. Looks like I'm drinking this weekend.

  • 36 - Dan(Miller)

    Nov 14, 2008 at 5:33 pm

    Alas, the poor girl did not even have the benefit of an ivy league education. She should have remained at home taking care of her kids. Doubtless, wise counsel will prevail upon her to do so in 2012. The sort of change she represents is not wanted, gosh darn. Any fool can see that. Go for it Joe (Biden, not the reactionary, poorly educated, middle class plumber)!

    Dan(Miller)

  • 37 - Al Barger

    Nov 14, 2008 at 6:22 pm

    Zing, maybe the "bad problem" with Palin getting more ink and love than McCain was that she should have been on TOP of the ticket.

    Being anti-literature and nutsy was of course the story line pushed by the opposing campaign staff, eg NBC, etc. But that doesn't mean it was true or that most people actually believed it. They talked much the same way about pre-presidential Reagan, didn't they?

  • 38 - zingzing

    Nov 14, 2008 at 6:38 pm

    oh god, al. palin as president? that would have been a total disaster for the republicans. not that it wasn't already, but sheeeeesh. that's some crazy talk. try to get one intelligent person NOT to smirk at you when you say that malarky out loud.

    she's nowhere near ready, even on a political-savvy level, to be president. she got manhandled by katie couric! katie! couric! the today show! or access hollywood, wherever she came from. she would have been a pin cushion in the middle east and the laughing stock of europe. she's melting down right now because of all the criticism. imagine, just for a second, if she was president. yeah, that's how long it takes for the white light to flash and then you're just a shadow. *shudder*

    as far as the "nutsy" stuff goes, i'm inclined to believe some of it, although not other bits. i won't say which because, frankly, there's far too much nutsy shit about her to go over and pick apart. if even 1/4 of the stuff they said about her is true, then... she's a nut. "you betcha" goes too far.

  • 39 - bliffle

    Nov 14, 2008 at 11:04 pm

    Bush? Then Palin? Dumb and dumber.

  • 40 - Al Barger

    Nov 15, 2008 at 1:03 am

    Zing and Bliffle- Do please keep telling yourselves that she's dumb, or melting down, or supposedly discredited. Keep telling yourself what you want to hear, and keep saying it even as ol' girl gets swept into the White House.

  • 41 - Jet

    Nov 15, 2008 at 1:14 am

    Yeah right Al, like you predicted McCain would get swept into the whitehouse. You need to put a bumbersticker on your car that proudly claims

    I VOTED FOR BUSH TWICE!!


    then another that says Palin in 2012!

    You're so great and proud at falsely handing down judgment on Obama supporters, where's your proud boasts about how right you were in this election?

  • 42 - Al Barger

    Nov 15, 2008 at 2:14 am

    Jet, what is your particular problem? I don't recall predicting that McCain would be swept into the White House. I must admit that I didn't think the public would elect a communist with no record, but stranger things have happened.

    For the record, I have never, ever voted for anyone named Bush. I in fact absolutely voted for Pat Robertson in the 88 primary rather than vote for Bush the Elder.

    And what false judgment have I handed down on Obama supporters? This article is nothing to do with Obama or his supporters.

  • 43 - Jet

    Nov 15, 2008 at 2:26 am

    You predicted Palin would get swept into the whitehouse... but if you're naive enough to believe that, who am I to argue?

    You called Obama a communist-which he isn't... but if you're naive enough to believe that who am I to argue?

    I should've known you'd vote for Pat Robertson, I'd actually given you credit for more intellect than that, I was wrong. Your attitude on this website just reeks with ultra right social conservative, so I figured (wrongly-sorry) you vote for Bush twice out of desparation. At this juncture I bet you tried to write in Joe the Plumber... right?

    I guess I underestimated you in the wrong direction.

    silly really

  • 44 - Al Barger

    Nov 15, 2008 at 2:40 am

    Jet- I suppose you could object to the word "communist." Speaking strictly, I should probably just call him a "Marxist." That would be a reasonably accurate and not unnecessarily inflammatory description of his stated positions.

    I don't think that Sister Sarah will be swept into the White House. She will have to fight hard to get in there.

    Calling me an "ultra right social conservative" is just silly and hysterical of you. As long as you've been here, you should know better than that foolishness. I'm a good libertarian. I'm (reluctantly) pro-choice, and certainly pro free speech. If it's done properly through the legislature, I'm open to the possibility of gay marriage.

    But I would like to have a little respect for just plain old fashioned decent Christians - even ones who believe in the Bible and therefore think that homosexual behavior is a sin.

    If it makes you feel better about me voting for Pat Robertson, I also voted for Jesse Jackson and in 2004 I wrote in Al Sharpton in the Democrat primary. I like to vote for a man of the cloth where I can - though there was NO way that even I could vote for Mike Huckabee.

  • 45 - Jet

    Nov 15, 2008 at 3:03 am

    You said you voted for Pat Robertson-I feel absolutely stupid that I'd think of you as a social conservative.

    Wielding the word communist puts you right up there with Sen McCarthy calling Lucy Ball a communist back in 1952 in a blatant and unsuccessful attempt at ruining her career.

    You should be more careful with your adjectives. If you meant Marxist you should've said Marxist.

    in any case Obama is neither.

  • 46 - Jet

    Nov 15, 2008 at 3:46 am

    Was it me? or was the reason the Palin news conference was only 4 questions long because of the governors she'd herded up behind her, that looked like they were going to bolt off the stage before she embarrassed them with the answer to her 5th question?

  • 47 - Glenn Contrarian

    Nov 15, 2008 at 4:10 am

    Al Barger -

    If my accusations are false, then please point out which of my accusations are false.

    And while you're at it, whom should we believe when it comes to what led to the spike in death threats against Obama (more than 500, more than any other president-elect)? Should we believe you? Or the Secret Service?

    And you're actually claiming that it's a GOOD thing that her husband belonged to a party that supports secession from America, whose founder cursed America and the flag? That, Mr. SUPER-patriot, has to be the most egregious hypocrisy I've EVER seen on any political forum.

    That's almost as bad as Republican Senator Saxby-Chambliss (who never served in the military) comparing his Vietnam Vet triple-amputee Purple-Heart awardee Democratic opponent to Osama bin Laden.

    I really, truly believe that you don't believe any such thing, that you're simply trying to defend Palin no matter what. But I'm curious, Al - have you EVER admitted on BC that you've been wrong about anything? Except for times that sarcasm served your purpose, of course....

    Oh yeah - if you need references for ANY of my claims on this or any other post, just ask. I do my best to only point out facts from reliable sources.

  • 48 - zingzing

    Nov 15, 2008 at 4:34 am

    al, you're a political moron, and i mean that in the kindest way. the only thing keeping you in check is prince and sinead o'connor. palin is a...

    you know what? hey, let people like al keep palin. she's a detriment to her own party, and therefore a benefit to ours.

    take a hint, people. these are our easy targets.

  • 49 - Jet

    Nov 15, 2008 at 5:36 am

    AL-...even ones who believe in the Bible and therefore think that homosexual behavior is a sin...


    And after you condemn all the homoSEXuals to Hell, you'll all go marching home to your biblical multiple wives and smear some lamb's blood on your doorsteps to make sure God loves you? That's what all the GOP fundraiser barbeques are all about, they're sacrificing an ox to the Lord Reagan in heaven so they'll be prosperous?

    What did Jesus say?

    Judge not lest ye be judged yourself.

    I shudder at what secret sins you've got hiding in your closet. What does the bible also say?

    Let he who is without sin cast the first stone.

    Probably why AL likes Palin so much, she's not a he (I hope) so technically she can cast the first stone... Carefully though-she can see Russia from her house and we wouldn't want any international incidents when she breaks a window with that first stone.

    Let he who is stoned cast the first sin?

  • 50 - zingzing

    Nov 15, 2008 at 5:55 am

    al: "I like to vote for a man of the cloth where I can[...]"

    good god, why? have you never heard of church and state? you know that we try to keep the two things separate, right?

    look, lovesexy is one thing, but for fuck's sake... alright, lovesexy is the greatest thing ever, but it's not an answer to our spiritual problems.

  • 51 - zingzing

    Nov 15, 2008 at 5:57 am

    if you people don't know what lovesexy is, and at the point, you are "you people," then you need to gain some knowledge.

    lovesexy is the glam of them all.

  • 52 - Al Barger

    Nov 15, 2008 at 11:45 am

    Indeed Zing, you can hang, you can trip on it - you surely won't fall.

    Another little clue Jet- I'm voting for the preachers in primaries, not the general election. I voted for Pat Robertson for one thing as a gesture of distaste for Bush the elder that he was running against. Plus, I wanted to do my little bit to break Jesse Jackson off up in the Democrat party. Plus, there's the fun I knew I'd have for many years telling people that I actually voted for Robertson or Al Sharpton.

    And "Marxist" is a exactly the right word for Obama. He speaks glowingly and lovingly of his time hanging out with Marxist professors as a college student. His whole outlook reflects it. He wants to spread Joe the Plumber's wealth around. You know, from each according to ability to each according to need.

    Generally, most Christians in my experience don't particularly sit around hating and judging on people for being gay, but homosexual behavior is pretty clearly sinful if you actually believe in the Bible. They might leave the judging to God, but they believe that is His standard.

    You can just decide that anybody who doesn't approve of your lifestyle is a dirty bigot. But then you should just accept that any serious Bible believing Christian is an evil bigot by definition.

  • 53 - Ruvy

    Nov 15, 2008 at 2:33 pm

    Brother Al,

    Ruvy, a "saint" is exactly what we don't need. Some messianic visionary who will save the world and heal the planet is a likely disaster. I'm looking for someone with a more humble view of their and our place. Big moral vision will lead us into crap quicker than almost anything. A green eyeshades type of guy like Romney is more what is needed.

    I happened to have admired Palin, especially how she was able to work a crowd. McCain was stupid to have waited as long as he did to consider her at all. And if he was considering her, he should have let her know, so that she could bone up on her weak points. McCain was a fool. But you Repulicans picked him and there you aren't - in the White House.

    I got what I wanted: a clear anti-Israel putz in your White House. Now I have to work on the other side of the deal - getting America-worshipping puppets in J-lem tossed into the jails they belong in.

    But don't count Palin out just yet. In the Midrash, it is related that one rabbi says to another "Nafli is coming" The other rabbi, puzzled, asks, "Who's Nafli?" The first rabbi says, "Nafli is the messiah." When you switch the Hebrew letters around according to the Atbash code, you get "Palin" (in the Hebrew alphabet, the "p" and "f" are the same letter). I don't think that Sister Sarah is the messiah, but apparently her appearance from "nowhere" - just like Obama, who got his start in presidential politics on Tish'á b'Áv - the "birthday" of the messiah according to Jewish tradition - is a sign of the big 'enchilada' about to be served mankind....

  • 54 - zingzing

    Nov 15, 2008 at 3:50 pm

    al: "He wants to spread Joe the Plumber's wealth around."

    no he doesnt. joe the plumber is not a plumber or rich.

    ruvy: "In the Midrash, it is related that one rabbi says to another "Nafli is coming" The other rabbi, puzzled, asks, "Who's Nafli?" The first rabbi says, "Nafli is the messiah." When you switch the Hebrew letters around according to the Atbash code, you get "Palin" (in the Hebrew alphabet, the "p" and "f" are the same letter)."

    is that some sort of a joke?

    "Obama, who got his start in presidential politics on Tish'á b'Áv - the "birthday" of the messiah according to Jewish tradition - is a sign of the big 'enchilada' about to be served mankind...."

    is obama the messiah? i'm sure you could find some torah code for it.

  • 55 - El Bicho

    Nov 15, 2008 at 4:09 pm

    al: "He wants to spread Joe the Plumber's wealth around."

    Can you have wealth when you have tax liens?

  • 56 - Al Barger

    Nov 15, 2008 at 4:25 pm

    See that's the thing with Joe. He doesn't have that much money, but he's aspiring to making it - and Obama ain't particularly interested in waiting till he's got money before figuring out how the gummint's going to spend it for him.

    Thus Obama demonstrates with his Marxist talk how to discourage wealth creation. Joe's thinking on how to make a nut, but there's the new president already telling him how he's going to take it away from him if he does. No sense trying to make any real money, and going through the risks and the sweat just to have it sucked down the government rathole.

  • 57 - zingzing

    Nov 15, 2008 at 4:34 pm

    al: "See that's the thing with Joe. He doesn't have that much money, but he's aspiring to making it - and Obama ain't particularly interested in waiting till he's got money before figuring out how the gummint's going to spend it for him."

    the point is that joe the plumber didn't have the money to buy that business. so he wasn't going to buy that business. and he wasn't going to make of $250k. so obama wouldn't have increased his taxes, as joe the plumber fits in with that large group of people that obama's tax plan would benefit.


  • 58 - Ruvy

    Nov 15, 2008 at 4:34 pm

    is that some sort of a joke?

    I thought it was when I first heard it. But, no, it isn't.

    is obama the messiah? i'm sure you could find some torah code for it.

    A legitimate Torah Code search on any of these things will not turn up predictions for the future. Only prophets can do that, and I sure as heck ain't no prophet.

    There is a Moslem prophecy that right before the End of Days, a black man will arise as leader in a major country.

    My point here is that all these events do smell of something that is Divinely inspired as a series of signs, and only a fool would ignore the "rough pavement ahead" signs that seem to be posted on History's Road....

  • 59 - El Bicho

    Nov 15, 2008 at 5:07 pm

    zing, stop using the facts of the matter.

  • 60 - Al Barger

    Nov 15, 2008 at 5:23 pm

    See Zing, that's some perfect Democrat thinking right there: Joe doesn't have the money, ain't no way he's ever going to succeed, fuggedabout it. And that's why he needs Lord St Obama to take care of him.

    Whereas, people do stuff every day that can't be done - much harder stuff than raising money to buy a little plumbing business.

  • 61 - zingzing

    Nov 15, 2008 at 5:35 pm

    no, al... the idea is that he doesn't have more than $250k, so he doesn't get his taxes raised by 3%.

    if he buys the business, his taxes are going to go up (by 3%). it's not that hard to figure out. he can then just use some tax law loopholes to mitigate that 3% down to nothing.

    you really don't get the idea, do you? he doesn't have enough money to even think about buying the business, so obama lets him keep a little more of his money, so that the day when he does have money enough comes a little bit faster. no bank on earth would loan him the money he needs to buy that business right now. but, if he keeps working and saving, on day they will.

  • 62 - Baronius

    Nov 15, 2008 at 5:53 pm

    Glenn - Since you mentioned it: I've looked into the Saxby Chambliss thing, and the ad was nothing like it's been depicted. It's negative, but nowhere near as rough as some of the 2008 presidential ads. But it's one of those stories that's grown with the telling, shall we say.

  • 63 - jamminsue

    Nov 16, 2008 at 1:13 am

    Ok, my turn to rant:
    It was not OK for Palin to have a pregnant teenage daughter because she had touted her pro-life, “Christian family values" and "soccer mom" attributes, which indicated a certain set of parenting skills and standards, which she does not seem to have passed to her daughter. If she had not claimed this certain behavior set, she would not have been venerable to attack. A word in season, understanding and/or providing access to prevention would have averted that problem.
    As an unbeliever, I find the parochialism of the narrow Protestants that are against anyone or thing that does not fit into their narrow, selective understanding of a great literary work that they elevated to a fantastic status to be a positive danger to an enlightened society. When given power, whether Christian, Islamic or whatever creed, they have done unspeakably vile things. It would do the rest of us some good to remember, and remind others.
    Homosexuality: Most psychologists and medical doctors I have spoken to on the subject have indicated 5% are treatable with psychoanalysis and the rest are made that way and nothing can change it. Those that said "let he who has not sinned cast the first stone" are off base, too, (sorry) as something that occurs naturally should be understood as part of God's Plan (if there is such a thing) therefore, one is sinning when he/she demonizes homosexuality.
    Knowledge: How can a person make an informed decision if they have not read about it? And, by “read” I mean explore issues by reading, talking, asking others; including more than one opinion position. Know-nothing Presidents " most recently Bush II and Regan were dependent on advisors, but how could they pick good advisors if they did not have SOME understanding? Bush II is a prime example of this. The impact of his know-nothing is abundantly clear. Regan began the current merry-go-round that is the “spend by borrowing” while playing “chicken” with the USSR. Those that think he was a great President now may change their tune after the next 10-20 years. The debt issue will most likely bring the US, and because of the international interdependence of finance, the entire world market to its knees. I sure hope not, but don’t see anyone talking sense on the subject of how to get out of this. Not that I think I know, in fact, I definitely do not.
    The Obama Press: Those conservatives cannot complain about any press that is liberal, as it was they who got rid of the fairness doctrine, along with the rest of the necessary regulations that they are now decrying the loss. And who said the press is liberal? A look at ownership of the big 5 would most likely force some reassessment.

  • 64 - jamminsue

    Nov 16, 2008 at 1:25 am

    It just occurred - I should have knocked the partly smart or smart and narrow minded: Clinton was a know-nothing with reference to Foreign policy, and succumbed to group-think, and so was also part of the problem. Carter was narrow in his viewpoint (that parochial thing again) and should have known better. Nixon had some good ideas on foreign policy but was also narrow in viewpoint. He had no clue on domestic stuff, pissed off the press, and really, really dirtied his nest.

  • 65 - Zedd

    Nov 16, 2008 at 1:52 am

    Al,

    I think you missed the point. The frustration wasn't about her alma mater. It wasn't about her getting the folksy image right. I was about her lack of substance. Much like your article, you miss what is important as she didn't articulate what was important. The Republican base is addicted to imagery and have lost the understanding of what is needed in a good leader. The imagery and "awe shucks" were used by Regan to woo you guys and now you crave them to feel good about a candidate. You missed the message and got addicted to the feel goods. The smart folks in your party realize just how destructive that tendency is to real ideals and real solutions being carried out.

  • 66 - Ruvy

    Nov 16, 2008 at 8:10 am

    ruvy: "In the Midrash, it is related that one rabbi says to another "Nafli is coming"

    zing: is that some sort of a joke?


    zing, I decided to look this up myself because I had only heard about it on Friday evening from our hostess when she invited us for a Sabbath meal. I had it wrong - the rabbis talked about "bar nafli" coming. But, go read for yourself at the Shirat Devorah web-site.

    The bottom line here is not that Sarah Palin is some kind of savior of any kind. But for some reason, she is to serve a reminder to us Jews that indeed G-d has a Redeemer on the way, and that every time, we hear her name, that is the point we need to remember.

    It may well be that after your country suffers the collapse it appears destined to suffer in the near future, Sarah Palin will be the president who pulls you out and gets you organized the right way. But if that is true, and I am only speculating here, she will not be the woman you have seen. She will have experienced spiritual growth that will enable her to fulfill the task. From my point of view, she is a passionate believer in G-d. That is what caught my own eye in the first place. And she is not a religious crazy, the kind of person who would have a thousand people drink poisoned Kool-Ade to fulfill some stupid fantasy.

    She is, in my opinion, the kind of person that can experience this spiritual growth and carry out the task that will be needed to bring your country back from the disaster it will have fallen into. But before she can, she will need to change somewhat herself.

  • 67 - Ruvy

    Nov 16, 2008 at 8:15 am

    It may well be that after your country suffers the collapse it appears destined to suffer in the near future, Sarah Palin will be the president who pulls you out and gets you organized the right way.

    This is pure speculation on my part, nothing else.

    G-d may have a larger role for her to play in history - or He may use her briefly and allow her to drop back into obscurity. I truly do not know.

  • 68 - Glenn Contrarian

    Nov 16, 2008 at 11:03 am

    Ruvy -

    Something I learned over the years of supervising people is that a highly competent subordinate that you REALLY don't like is FAR more preferable to an incompetent and unqualified subordinate.

    On another topic, I told you that I worked with a narcissist for years - and I did. Very smart guy, very, very good at his job, but he and I had many shouting matches, sometimes mere inches from each other's face I also had another guy working for me at the same rank, and this guy was much friendlier and shared my world view on many things.

    The narcissist also tried to get me busted. It was nothing personal on his part - I was simply in his way in his climb to the top. The other guy I could trust not to stab me in the back.

    HOWEVER, as a supervisor, I had to say then and now that the narcissist was a better part of the team due to his skill, qualifications, and work ethic...and ability to lead the crew in my absence. The other guy I could not trust to do these things, even though I liked and personally trusted him.

    YOU LIKE SARAH...but she is not only ignorant of high-school-level civics and geography (which ignorance has been pointed out to her by the media), but does not even seem to comprehend WHY she should be concerned about her ignorance.

    If Obama's and Sarah's levels of knowledge of civics, geography, culture, and the Constitution were reversed...I'd vote for Sarah in a heartbeat even though I REALLY don't like her. Why? Because I don't want someone who knows less than I do being in charge of the nation's economy and the nuclear trigger.

    We've already had eight years of an intellectually incurious president - one would hope that would be enough for us to choose a more qualified, more professional, more educated president from now on.

  • 69 - Ruvy

    Nov 16, 2008 at 11:37 am

    Glenn,

    As Sarah Palin is today, she will be no better than anyone else in handling a cataclysm that faces your nation.

    Perhaps the one thing she might do better is push for people to pray - to give thanks to G-d for x or y occurring or not occurring.

    I too have been a supervisor, and from litle I saw of Sarah Palin, she was someone I could trust to get things done. A man who has voted present in the United States Senate is not one who will get things done - except when it benefits him personally.

    But all this is besides the point.

    Your nation is headed for disaster - the only question is when the disaster will occur, and how quickly. So it is irrelevant who is the leader. The cataclysm will overcome that leader. That means Obama, Bush, NcCain, or Palin or Biden. It makes no difference.

    My reference to Palin is to a period after this disaster has occurred, when conditions will be entirely different. And any leader of your country will have to have grown spiritually to be effective. Under these changed conditions, a narcissist will not be an effective leader.

    In addition, that Palin might be your leader is only a speculation on my part.

    Both Obama and Palin appear to be here in prominent roles by Divine Hand. That does not mean that either of them is a positive influence. It simply means, IMHO, that their presence is a sign of an approaching change that will be huge, and for many catastrophic.

  • 70 - Al Barger

    Nov 16, 2008 at 12:26 pm

    Jamminsue sez re: Palin's pregnant daughter "A word in season, understanding and/or providing access to prevention would have averted that problem."

    Ha, ha, ha! Good one! If Mom had just told her not to get laid, she wouldn't have done it. Yeah, that works. That Christians sometimes fall short of their ideals does not discredit their ideas. And that their child might slip from the most preferred behavior certainly does not discredit them.

    You seem to be whipping up a pretty evil and largely fictional accounting in which to lump all religious people - as if Muslim fanatics are equivalent to American Baptists. Then you lay all that on Sister Sarah. I've never heard her bashing on gays or on any such.

    Sounds to me like some of y'all are just going to go on a hatey-hate rant against anyone who appears to be an actual believing Christian.

    Also though, conservatives have every good reason to bitch about the over the top cheesy liberalism of much of the press. Just note that the conservatives are NOT clamoring for some kind of gummint regulation to change that.

    Instead, they have their own alternative information sources, mostly through smaller and more neutral papers, talk radio and the internet. It is, of course, liberals wanting to bring back the Fairness Doctrine just exactly to quash opinions dissenting from the NPR/NBC line.

  • 71 - zingzing

    Nov 16, 2008 at 4:07 pm

    "Sounds to me like some of y'all are just going to go on a hatey-hate rant against anyone who appears to be an actual believing Christian."

    nah, just don't want one of them crazy loons in office.

    "Instead, they have their own alternative information sources, mostly through smaller and more neutral papers, talk radio and the internet."

    how, really, can "conservative media" be considered neutral? it's more CONSERVATIVE, al. it doesn't even have to try to be neutral, apparently.

    "It is, of course, liberals wanting to bring back the Fairness Doctrine just exactly to quash opinions dissenting from the NPR/NBC line."

    do you know what the fairness doctrine is? obviously, you misunderstood the point of it. or really believe in the power of radio.

  • 72 - Al Barger

    Nov 16, 2008 at 7:46 pm

    Zing- I'm perfectly well aware of what the Orwellian-ly named "Fairness Doctrine" is - are you? It is absolutely nothing other than the intent of quashing opposition viewpoints, and a complete travesty against the First Amendment.

    Working around the Pravda press, the NYT et al, there are some of the sources that are more or less just not pinko biased. Lots of regular newspapers across the country are halfway reasonable and more or less neutral sources of information.

    Then there is conservative talk radio, ie Rush Limbaugh. That is also a good alternative information source, bringing forth relevant and important facts ignored or purposely covered up by the Obama media mafia. Trying to suppress him in particular is the point of leftwing brown shirts wanting to re-impose the fascistic "Fairness Doctrine."

    Then, of course, it's important to have more info sources than Rush Limbaugh. He is an unabashedly partisan information source, and would not claim to be the only source of information you need. He's not the paper of record - just one guy with a golden microphone.

    I see your distinction between disliking Christians vs just not trusting them with the nukes. DIG THIS God bless the Louvin Brothers.

    So, I can understand the trepidation in theory, but watching Miss Sarah, she does not seem like she's going to turn into Martin Sheen in The Dead Zone. "The missles are flying. Hallelujah!" Faith of her fathers besides, Palin seems like one of the most positively grounded individuals near high office. Mitt Romney comes to mind as another one relatively pure of heart and sensible.

    In both cases, one might understandably raise an eyebrow over their religious beliefs. But a lot depends on how you take things. I'd judge the proof of the pudding by the eating. Both of these specific people seem to be kind, loving, well grounded individuals coming from strong, positive communities. Beyond that, they could be praying to Ba'al for all I care.

  • 73 - zingzing

    Nov 16, 2008 at 8:28 pm

    al, certainly the fairness doctrine needs to be worded differently, but the general aim of it is not to shut down conservative opinion. in fact, one would have to think, what with the "liberal bias" of the media, that it would be to the left's general detriment if it was reinstated as currently written.

    like many good ideas, the execution of the fairness doctrine was not perfect, or even preferable. but, we've seen where it failed before. and we see the problems we have today. the left and the right make up crap and present it as news. if some sort of fairness doctrine was in place, i think the general level of rhetoric would improve/decrease. we may actually get both sides of the story without having to take everything with a grain of salt.

  • 74 - Jet

    Nov 16, 2008 at 8:44 pm

    Al:"Rush Limbaugh. That is also a good alternative information source" I'd laugh my head off if I didn't think you were completely serious.

    What's he doing Al; sharing his Oxycodone with you?

  • 75 - Clavos

    Nov 16, 2008 at 9:56 pm

    do you know what the fairness doctrine is? obviously, you misunderstood the point of it. or really believe in the power of radio.

    Actually, zing, I think he's dead on.

    Liberal talk radio doesn't sell much advertising, so if the FD is reinstated, radio station owners, rather than provide money-losing air time to liberal shows in counterpoint to the conservative ones, will simply drop the conservative shows.

    The liberals pushing the reinstatement of the FD figured this out some time ago.

Add your comment, speak your mind

Personal attacks are NOT allowed.
Please read our comment policy.
Please preview your comment.

blogcritics lists for Nov 09, 2009

fresh articles Most recent articles site-wide

fresh comments Most recent comments site-wide

most comments Most comments in 24hrs

top writers Most prolific Blogcritics for October

top commenters Most prolific Commenters in 24 hrs