An opinion column in the Wall Street Journal notices a serious Problem with a Palin Campaign for President. She hasn’t been properly vetted. No. Really. That is what they said.
Mrs. Palin’s initial mistreatment, by a press (on the right and the left) that was both jeering and patronizing, has in fact resulted in an unfortunate phenomenon. It has allowed Mrs. Palin to dismiss any criticism of her—no matter how straightforward—as yet more hostility from opponents, or as hoity-toity blather from inside-the-Beltway mopes.
This isn’t healthy. Mitt Romney, Newt Gingrich, Tim Pawlenty—all have already been through the wringer, and at the hands of conservatives focused on obtaining a competent nominee. If Mrs. Palin wants the most powerful job on the planet, she shouldn’t be averse to the same critical questioning.
Uh. You are not getting it. Let me explain it in a few small words using big letters.
I suppose it would be wise to expand on that for those not following LSM circulation figures.
That is all.
Cross Posted at Power and Control
Comments
14 responses to “The Problem With Palin”
Yeah, that ‘vetting’ worked really well in 2008, didn’t it?
The thing that scares the media most about Palin is, as you said, that she doesn’t need them. THEY used to be in control. THEY used to define the issues of the day. THEY were the makers and shapers of news and opinion.
How dare she NOT let them savage her!
She was a new and relatively unknown governer of a relatively obscure western state… of course, she never appeared on the radar of the national media. She’s supposed to be a dumb hick from the sticks … really, I’m not the least surprised that they are taken by surprise.The Tea Party took them by surprise, too.
At a time when a Harvard degree, and community organizer is all the credentials needed to be USA president, the whole thing becomes a MSM JOKE.
Is Palin a leader? Does she have the ability to bring the skeptics over to her side like Reagan did? If you compare the two, I doubt it.
Reagan was belittled at the time as much if not more than Palin is now. But unlike Sarah, he was a very well read man who actually took the time to think, and weigh other opinions against his beliefs. He was able to charm his political adversaries like Tip O’Neil and accomplish near miracles with Democrats in charge of congress the whole time.
I doubt Palin’s ability to do this, even if she is somehow elected, and especially if she remains a Republican.
So far her bus tour is a great success. She is continuing to set the terms and limit her exposure. What she can’t do, and won’t do, is have a real in depth discussion about any important issue. To defend an ideology you must know opposing beliefs; you must show
consistency; and you must have the ability to verbalize it without garbled syntax.
Palin, for all her virtues, is the weakest of candidates. She takes the right positions, but doesn’t have the ability to defend them. She has great political instincts, like her recent dumping of neo-con advisers and opposition to Obama’s Libyan adventure, and calling out Romney on health care mandates at Bunker Hill. Brilliant!
If my guess is right, she will not enter any Republican primary. She’s already made a decision to not waste precious money on a divisive primary battle. Even if she were to win the Republican primary, Bloomberg and the establishment Repubs would form a third party ensuring Obama’s reelection. So, she will sit out the primaries, and let Romney win by default.
You can form your own opinion about her plans after that.
But unlike Sarah, he was a very well read man who actually took the time to think, and weigh other opinions against his beliefs. He was able to charm his political adversaries like Tip O’Neil and accomplish near miracles with Democrats in charge of congress the whole time.
Conventional wisdom, like strawmen, always makes me laugh.
Let’s just keep repeating that she’s an ignorant, stupid, snowbilly breeder and that’ll be conventional wisdom.
Ronnie worked so well with the opposition that Teddy Kennedy tried to work with the Soviets to keep him from being elected and Tip savaged him whenever possible. Ronnie got stuff done despite the Dems not because of them.
Bush worked well with the Dems in Texas, with the crew in DC? Not so much.
And Frank, I’m not arguing with you so much as pointing and laughing. I’m not going to get into a “Oh yeah, well prove she’s well read” troll-circle.
I’ve noticed that many people just belittle the people they don’t like to avoid having to actually respond to anything substantive.
In my life I’ve noticed that every effective conservative is either evil or stupid. Except W Bush, he was a machiavellian idiot.
Hell, even non-effective ones like Gerald Ford had to wear that mantle.
I don’t argue it anymore, I just point, laugh and say, “Yeah, I see you’re thinking the way our social, political, moral and intellectual betters want you to think”.
Just to be clear…
The argument is that Sarah Palin has not been put “through the wringer” by the press.
Wow.
Reality-based indeed.
Well just to get into the stupidity of it all (Thanks for the warning Veeshir) I want to tell you what I’ve been seeing lately.
More than one comment to the effect “Now I don’t agree with Palin much but she is right on that one.”
How many more of those do you need (4?, 6?) before people say. “You know I don’t agree with Palin on anything but look at the issues she has right.”
This is not going to be a conventional campaign. If Palin runs she will not hedge her bets. That is her strength. And her weakness.
Me? I like it. YMMV
Clint,
Yeah. That cracked me up.
Veeshir:
Let’s just keep repeating that she’s an ignorant, stupid,
I don’t for a minute think Palin is stupid or ignorant. Far from it, she is very bright, but like a lot of conservatives doesn’t think “book learning” is all that important. This criticism comes from an old piece by Ayn Rand to the effect that conservatives rely on tradition – what worked in the past is a guide to the present, etc. Also, people who are doers, who live life rather than contemplate it, don’t usually take the time to examine their core beliefs or engage in introspection. But how do you defend your beliefs when they are under attack? Do you just repeat tired old slogans or quote The Bible? If she is seriously going to go up against a man with a law degree from Harvard she will need more than folksy one-liners. That only worked for Reagan because he had spent years reading and examining his own beliefs as he went from a union organizing Democrat to a libertarian leaning Republican. He knew who Bastiat and von Mises were, and could hold his own in a debate. He also had a fantastic ability to give a speech with just a few cue cards at hand, giving the impression that he was speaking totally from memory.
As Eric has stated, I like Palin, a lot. I just wish she had taken the last 2 years to put a little muscle under her message instead of playing huntress on TV.
As to Reagan and Tip O’Neil, I stand by my statement. Reagan became friends with him and O’Neil let him have his way on more than one occasion. From Chris Mathews who was O’Neil’s aide:
“Tip had the last word and it was a good one,” Reagan jotted in his diary after one meeting. Another entry: “I’m having more luck with Demos than Repubs. Asked O’Neill if I could address a joint session next week. He agreed.”
As I remember it, O’Neil paid lip service opposing Reagan, but allowed over 60 in his party to vote for Reagan’s budget cutbacks.
One other thing. People on this message board are not going to like what Palin is up to. She is going to run to the left of Obama on foreign policy.
If she is seriously going to go up against a man with a law degree from Harvard
True – he got the degree.But does he know anything about the law? That is not evident.
Harvard can do anything it wants when it comes to getting a degree. Being learned in a subject doesn’t seem to be a requirement for some students.
====
As I remember it, O’Neil paid lip service opposing Reagan, but allowed over 60 in his party to vote for Reagan’s budget cutbacks.
Let me see 97 to 0 against Obama’s budget. They must be pulling the same maneuver. And Palin hasn’t even been elected yet.
===
She is going to run to the left of Obama on foreign policy.
OK with me. She knows the enemy. If she wants to fight them differently I’m more than willing to listen.
In a long war it is wise to keep changing your tactics while maintaining your goal.
Maybe she has read Hart. Or his close relative Patton.
M. Simon:
I hope you are right about Palin. My little attempt at quarter-backing from the bleachers won’t matter anyway. As to reading Patton, it’s more likely she has the native ability to fight. To quote Chief Joseph:
It does not require many words to speak the truth.
“She is going to run to the left of Obama on foreign policy.”
What I love is the reams of evidence you provide for that statement. Never mind that nothing I can find that is actually what she said (not what some Leftard claims she said) indicates that in the slightest.
SDN, it’s speculation, and is based on two things:
1. Obama is triangulating with foreign policy and has been getting a lot kudos from Republicans and neo-cons for his tough stand on Pakistan and his intervention in Libya.
2. Palin let go neo-con advisers, has spoken out against the Libyan adventure, and has called for ending aid to Egypt. Neo-cons support continuing aid to what they see as democracy movements in the Middle East.
Did you notice that 87 House Republicans voted for the Kucinich bill to end Obama’s illegal use of our military, while the Republican leadership supported Obama?
Palin is forming a block outside the mainstream. I’m guessing her thinking is that we have enough “me too” Republicans like Boehner and Romney.
It’s called going rogue.