It means she gets our attention.

Who the heck is in charge of her "staging"

Sarah is still a star and, right now, she's far and away the brightest star in the conservative galaxy. She's going to be the leading Republican star, campaigning (and fundraising) for Republican candidates for the next four years.

We still don't know if she's going to break out of that niche a la Reagan. I think that will depend on the success or failure of the O-team.

RH,

It would have helped if her holiday message had been more inclusive. Nothing for Jews or seculars.

She thinks her future is with the Jesus Party. And it may be so. Unfortunately there are more than a few Republicans not interested in supporting a Jesus Party.

Reagan's genius was his ability to appeal to the whole party. He personally was rather light on organized religion. He had a close friend and confidant who died in the arms of his mistress (actually the position was a little more compromising than that). Reagan was rather worldly coming from the acting milieu.

I have to tell you I am losing my enthusiasm for Palin. We will see if she can earn a second term in Alaska. I doubt it.

Hey now, Instapundit gets paid by Amazon to hawk their crap. Don't you be going and hawking it for free.

M, seriously, you want her to be ecumenical in her holiday message, she left Kwanza & Festivus,too, out of the picture.Ironically,
were she to move to a higher office, she'd probably please your side more and tick off some of her most fervent supporters. But if you want to insist on pure libertarianism based on your Chicago experience, well that's your right, but don't be surprised on the consequences of said actions. That's a little too mercenary a view of Reynold's links, he links what he thinks others are interested in. The calendar indicates in someways solidarity for what she went through, what she believes, and support for what she might do in the future.

Anon,

To do something she first has to get elected. If all she wants is to be the Republican nominee she probably could get it with the themes she is running on. That is not enough for the general election though.

Speaking of the Illinois experience: Alan Keyes. I voted for Obama in that election. I'd do it again.

I think for her holiday message a simple "Merry Christmas" would have sufficed. Or better "Merry Christmas and Happy Holidays".

In Alaska before the last Presidential election no one knew her religion. Her platform was good government. I was hoping she would return to that stance.

Well M, you're not going to unring that bell, she's a Christian, it informs her views on life, she's a libertarian on much everything else; probably the most Hayekian gal imaginable. She's moving forward with the pipeline, health care reform, a dozen other initiatives. You were left with a false choice thanks to David Axelrod, Jack Ryan deserved that seat. So if forced to choose again between a real reformer, and a product of an old city machine; who do you choose.

narciso,

I have no problem with what informs her views on life. If she is going to run as Alan Keyes II she will not get my vote or that of a lot of other Republicans.

Go back and look at the 2004 Senate race results.

Given America as it is today she would do better running on competent governance than on a quasi religious platform.

It wouldn't hurt if she got an education in economics. Actually reading some Hayek instead of getting it second hand would help. A little Friedman wouldn't hurt either. Walking the walk is excellent. It wouldn't hurt to be able to talk the talk. In fact I did a post suggesting that people send her "Free to Choose" and "The Road to Serfdom".

BTW I am a Jack Ryan Republican. In fact I would have voted for Oberweis. Instead my "brilliant" State Senator Syverson rammed Keyes through and it was a rout. Bush got some 130,000 more Republican votes than Keyes did. And Keyes' disowning his daughter because she was gay in the first State to repeal its anti-gay laws?

Oh. Well.

I probably should rephrase the above. The 130,000 was the undervote in the Keyes-Obama race. A lot of Bush supporters also voted for Obama.

Keyes is a fool, he might have had some good points twenty years ago, but he's a nut now. Don't try to make a comparison between Keyes and Palin; it really doesn't
fly. I didn't know that this was an actual
blooper, not just horrible happenstance. She's never been judgmental about anyone besides crooks and terrorists; and that's a good group to be judgemental about.
Vanderleun is right "Republicans not only thirst for death, but they'd rather be
dead than be led by Palin." It's only marginally? better here in South Florida, as for statewide, don't remind me. When she was down here, a month ago, a breath of fresh air in a stale room;, she talked of holding the line on taxes, against the bailout (did they listen, not for long)
reclaiming the immigrant and the working
class's support of the party. When they burned down her church; she talked of
having a 'servant's heart when it comes to public service; I guess that's a Christian
reference. I 'don't mean to beat a dead moose here' but she was the only good thing
to come out of this wretched thing we called
a presidential campaign. Sorry if I get overwrought over these sorts of things

narciso,

A "servant's heart" is good. It is non-denominational. In fact it could even be secular.

I'm not arguing governance. I'm arguing sales pitch.

Does she want to be just the Republican nominee or would she like to be President? Does she want just the Christian wing of the Party behind her or would she like to gather in the seculars too?

The Christians know who she is. Se has to sell herself to the rest of the Party and then to America. It would be easier if she laid off the Christian themes and focused the next 4 years on secular themes.