Today on Blogcritics
Home » Culture and Society » With Michele Bachmann Running For President, Sarah Palin Doesn’t Have To

With Michele Bachmann Running For President, Sarah Palin Doesn’t Have To

Please Share...Tweet about this on Twitter0Share on Facebook0Share on Google+0Share on LinkedIn0Pin on Pinterest0Share on TumblrShare on StumbleUpon0Share on Reddit0Email this to someone

Fueled by her performance Monday at the debate in New Hampshire, Michele Bachmann has launched her campaign for the White House with much apparent fanfare and momentum.

Despite this newfound energy her presidential aspirations now have, the Minnesota Republican also likely is casting a watchful eye to see whether Sarah Palin jumps in to steal her thunder.

Others have long speculated on what a contest between these two crown princesses of the tea party might look like.

Yet, if the former half-term governor of Alaska is smart, she’ll take Bachmann’s entry into the race not as a chance for competition, but instead as a golden opportunity.

It’s pretty clear that Palin’s not really interested in running for president. She’s been teasing the possibility only as a means to keep her celebrity, and personal wealth, going.

MSNBC’s Lawrence O’Donnell successfully has built a case that this is so, particularly by noting that Palin hadn’t been asked to leave her lucrative job at Fox News the way other, actual, candidates appearing on the network were.

If Palin were really running, Fox chief Roger Ailes would have dismissed her as he did with Newt Gingrich and Rick Santorum. Instead, she’s stayed along with Mike Huckabee, who publicly took himself out of the running.

O’Donnell’s right when he called Palin’s campaign a “mirage.”

Although Palin’s recent bus tour of the East Coast had the trappings of a nascent 2012 campaign, O’Donnell’s correct when he noted that it was really about Palin’s personal enrichment.

“Its purpose is to keep Sarah Palin‘s fame flame burning brightly and to raise money for the kind of fun she and her family can have by not running for president,” he says.

The bus tour was, in fact, a profit lap for SARAHPAC, Palin’s political fund that spent $277,000 last year on her travel alone.

“Sarah PAC is a giant slush fund for the Palins and it needs replenishing before real Republican presidential candidates start attracting the real flood of campaign contributions they will need to mount a challenge to President Barack Obama who, after all the money has been raised and spent by both Republicans and Democrats and after all the votes are counted on November 6th, 2012, will remain president of the United States for another four years,” O’Donnell says. “And Sarah Palin is smart enough to know that.”

Which is how we arrive at the opportunity for Palin that Bachmann’s candidacy represents.

Since Palin never really intended to run for president, Bachmann’s entry into the race gives the Alaskan an easy out.

Given that both are crown princesses of the tea party — even appearing together at a rally last year — Palin now can announce, “Tea party values are alive and well thanks to Michele’s historic campaign. I will not be a candidate for president in 2012, but I will fight on to see our values restored in the Oval Office.”

Or words to that effect, delivered with the requisite punctuation of eye-winks and “You betchas.”

But more than a graceful exit, this maneuver provides Palin a whole new revenue stream.

Palin need only climb back onto her bus and become a roving right-wing ambassador, basking in angry-conservative adulation and hauling out her personal cash register at each stop to raise money to replenish that giant slush fund she needs to keep topped off.

I imagine that she could ride this motherlode all through the primaries, promising all the while to work her little heart out to elect her tea party buddy president.

It’s the ultimate win-win for both women. Michele Bachmann gets the clear shot for nomination that she wants, and Sarah Palin gets what she really craves: enduring celebrity and even more fabulous wealth.

 

Powered by

About Scott Nance

  • Baronius

    I hate to state the obvious, but why can’t two women run for President? Would you have used similar terminology about “princes”?

  • zingzing

    there’s only room for one misinformed, clearly insane raging ego in this race.

    and yes, baronius, scott is a complete misogynist. i’m surprised he didn’t call them “tea party bitches” at this point. it’s crazy. can we just not mention it again in the hopes that this doesn’t turn into a comment thread dominated by trading shots over which party is more sexist? ok thanks.

  • Baronius

    Zing, there’s always room for more misinformed, clearly insane raging egos.

  • Arch Conservative

    there’s only room for one misinformed, clearly insane raging ego in this race

    I thought we were discussing Palin and Bachmann, not the Obamessiah.

  • JL

    Since you insist on referring to Palin as the fomer half-term governor..I will refer to our dictator in chief as the former one-third term senator…only fair.

  • JL

    The premise of your title is analogous to the following…With Richard Burton playing Hamlet..Laurence Olivier won’t have to…I think the play (ie, country) would suffer a loss in that exchange..don’t you?
    Or maybe you should change the title of your hit piece…to the following.
    “With Bachmann running, we media weasels can only promote the H$LL out of her and hope it dissuays Palin from entering the race”…more accurate I would think

  • zingzing

    oh, that wit, archie. you saw that joke miles away, bumbling down the joke highway in a joke-mobile and you stuck out your hitching thumb and rode that joke-loppy straight on into jokesville, didn’t you?

    and you do seem to be the only one cradling that “messiah” stuff still. when will you wean your insults off the teat? thing’s like 4 years old now. it’s strange to see an insult that old still in diapers.

  • zingzing

    jl, please explain how obama is a dictator.

  • Arch Conservative

    I guess it doesn’t matter what I call him anymore zing.

    If unemployment is still above 8% next year his ass will be nothing but an ugly footnote in the annals of American history, regardless of who his opponent is.

    Now go have some more koolaid.

  • zingzing

    heh. you drink your flavor and i’ll drink mine, but for god’s sake, stop with the cliches… koolaid, messiah jokes… can you say anything that you haven’t gotten from someone else?

    and i don’t need to bring up your very poor history with making political predictions.

  • http://cinemasentries.com/ El Bicho

    “only fair”

    Considering one quit and one got a promotion, not really, but then your analogous example isn’t accurate so I understand why you don’t see the difference.

  • Arch Conservative

    So what’s your prediction zing?

    He winds with over 8% unemployment?

    You willing to stand on that?

  • Glenn Contrarian

    Arch –

    President Obama will be reelected – I saw a poll today that showed that 64% of the population thought Obama was either not responsible or only somewhat responsible for our nation’s economic woes. But it’s not the 2012 election that concerns me – it’s the 2016 election.

  • zingzing

    my prediction? i don’t make predictions, especially not nearly a year and a half out. and i don’t think it’s as simple as you make it out to be. i hope that unemployment is under 8% by that point, but the gov’t’s ability to control the economy is negligible at best. and even the most hopeful of predictions say that unemployment will go down slowly.

    but, you know, the american people can be quite stupid, and may vote based on one number and putting all the blame for that one number on one man, even if it’s not remotely true.

    of course, if the republicans actually gave a shit about jobs (any jobs legislation forthcoming? of course not…), they’d be out there creating jobs (magically, of course), rather than trying to shut down planned parenthood (all those abortions must be creating jobs for someone). but they don’t give a shit about creating jobs. especially not when it wouldn’t do them a lick of good. god bless the republicans.

  • steve

    I hate to tell the self-deluded folks in here but according to GALLUP, any Republican is ahead of Obama by 4 points.

    Palin and Bachmann have the same right winged ideology of slashing taxes, squeezing back government, releasing shackles from business, etc.

    Four horrible years of liberalism under Obama virtually hands the election to anyone who runs against him.

    Palin is our Reagan. Smart and always 10 steps ahead of the people who call her an idiot. She’s so confident, like Reagan was, she allows herself to be the butt of other people’s jokes.

    Bachmann is more like a Thatcher. More bookish, composed, etc. She doesn’t excite like Palin or Reagan (nor did Thatcher) but when a mess is created to such a degree as Obama’s, you can be bookish, nerdy, and win on the basis of your ideology only.

    The only thing libs can do now — which they are trying very hard to do — is convince us to run a RINO like Mitt Romney who could not even beat John McCain in 2008.

  • http://blogcritics.org/writers/dr-dreadful/ Dr Dreadful

    I hate to tell the self-deluded folks in here but according to GALLUP, any Republican is ahead of Obama by 4 points.

    No, Steve. Gallup pitted a generic Republican against Obama – that is to say, a nameless, faceless nobody. Realistically, it’s not a lot different than asking voters whether they prefer the Republican or the Democratic Party.

    Not at all the same as saying any Republican can beat Obama, as the head-to-head polls show. In those, Romney is the only potential GOP candidate who makes any sort of showing.

    Different things happen when you introduce actual personalities. I guarantee you, for instance, that Ronald Reagan (R) would fare a lot better than Mad Mac “Build-The-Border-Fence-Entirely-Out-Of-Live-Nuclear-Armed-Minuteman-Missiles-Then-When-That’s-Done-Burn-All-The-Homosexuals-On-The-Front-Lawn-Of-The-White-House” McMad (R).

  • http://cinemasentries.com El Bicho

    “Palin is our Reagan. Smart and always 10 steps ahead of the people who call her an idiot. She’s so confident, like Reagan was, she allows herself to be the butt of other people’s jokes.”

    Talk about self-deluded. You either don’t know Reagan or what the word “smart” means. Is she so confident she purposely screwed up the story of Paul Revere?

  • Mary

    So I guess being sexist is alright. You can’t have two women running. Bachman has zero executive experience but because she is a woman we’ll call it affirmative action.

  • Jordan Richardson

    Steve called Sarah Palin “smart” and Michele Bachmann “bookish.” Oh my.

  • REMF (MCH)

    @ Steve;
    I’m just glad Paul Revere “warned the British that we weren’t givin’ up our guns…”

  • http://cinemasentries.com/ El Bicho

    To be fair, after thinking about it, Sarah Palin might be smart to Steve.

  • Arch Conservative

    I saw a poll today that showed that 64% of the population thought Obama was either not responsible or only somewhat responsible for our nation’s economic woes.

    Who conducted the poll? Media matters?

    Oh and Steve…….Palin is our Reagan?

    You might wanna rethink that one.

    I could get behind Paul, Bachmann and possibly Christie if he throws his hat in. The rest of the GOP field is dead to me as was that crazy old man in 2008.

  • Curth

    These two women are nothing alike. Governor Palin has a steller 17 year record of leadership. She has cut taxes even though her state had a surplus. She left her state with a 12 Billion surplus. She fought and defeated the big oil companies in Alaska. She fought corruption and got members of both parties convicted.

    And Bachmann? Her accomplishments? When she has ONE, let us know.

  • Curth

    I meant to say she cut the state budget even though the state had a surplus. She did cut taxes too.

    And to [edited] who thinks she was wrong about Paul Revere, she wasn’t.

  • Glenn Contrarian

    Um, Curth –

    Why don’t you read some real history? Here’s some from Factcheck.org, which includes a link to Paul Revere’s OWN recollection of his ride…and frankly, I’m more inclined to believe Paul Revere than Sarah Palin when it comes to accounts of Paul Revere’s ride.

  • Cheryl Zellers

    I personally am appaled that these two women are running for president. These women represent women in the U.S.–I think not. Barbie and Princess are passe, but they sure are running on this ticket. They may be women but they are both running patriarchal style. Look at the comments made at them. They are “princess'” and “barbies” a real man’s woman. Styled after the fad of Trophy wife, now we are moving into Trophy Presidents. Come on folks get real. But the good news is that we as “American People” have never seen Democracy, go ahead define it–if only for yourself–no one agrees–I can assure you. Please do not believe what you were taught in history books do your own research. For instance, Ben Franklin was a double agent, backed by Great Britain, a leader of the Coup de Taut that first derailed the original intentions of the people of freedom for the people,and of freedom from the mother land rule and taxation…not only was he an agent of Britian he had the power of being a journalist–the power of words, helped to create the docuument we refer to as US Constitution which gives all rights to the centralized government and not to the people, nor is it written for the people, but for Taxation, Trade, and Military issues. B.F. headed the few, very few, behind closed doors representatives in derailing midstream the Articles of Confederation being drawn to protect the peoples rights thus bringing about the US Constitution. This document is to give carte blanc to a then yet to be formed centralized government that was to utilyze the concepts of Congress–they themselves were to be–the Supreme Court, and to create a position of presidency (President was merely to sit in for Congress one month per year–hmmmm). This triad was created for checks and balances. Hmmmm, again. Many ratifications later and 230 some years later here we are. Oh did I mention a fine man, John Morton, President of the Committee on Articles of Confederation, (i.e. with Federation–they had not yet agreed to a United States of America) was murdered (under cover –like today)just prior to the take over. All of the power was given to a yet unformed government and taken from the local governing bodies of the Territories, States, and Colonies that existed at the time–not many 11 or so. Politics of foreign trade, a centralized army that was to be paid, taxation of the territories, states, and colonies for these purposes was priority of the US Constitution. Thats right folks it was never written for your protection but for your enslavement to taxes for a then forming Centralized Government. Whats different today? Nothing. There was nothing put in place to support people’s concerns and issues and freedoms to live the way they were choosing to live, only these few issues were of importance to those few of the Coup De Taut initiating this document behind closed doors–leaving out the opinions, votes and ideas of the majority of the Territories, States, and Colonies. These few then forcefully brought the document to the remaining few Territories, States, and Colonies to ratify. Some holding out (they had good reason to) the US Constitution was not ratified for some time. I believe it was Maryland who ratified last. John Morton’s family lost their entire Pennsylvania fortune and farm to the British — sometime after these events took place. There continued to be warefare waged at the Colonists and their Native friends by the British for some time. I do not believe that Great Britian ever really let up. …any ways that is my piece of the pie. So why do we give so much importance to the Presidency of the U.S. when the entire event is fraud?