[quote=“Fotheringay-Phipps, post:460, topic:501843”]
. . .and become part of the Washington scene.
QUOTE]
Nooooooooooooo! ! ! Do. Not. Want!
I’m not sure I agree. I don’t think any of her press time was Alaska based. Actually, I think the only Alaska-centric coverage she got was scandal-like. Touring about without questions or ties lets her ride the original coattails unencumbered.
Limbaugh’s commentary really seals the logic of this to me. It was essentially an endorsement of her act, and a welcoming to the ranks of the GOP opinion-makers who can say any crazy shit they want, without, you know, having to do a damn thing about it. (See Hannity, Sean; Gingrich, Newt.) The ladies’ wing of the club is more or less moribund (Coulter, Ingraham, Malkin, where are you?) so she will be the Queen of the GOP.
She really doesn’t have to do a damn thing. She can make oodles of cash as a talking head or giving speeches. There will, of course, be an effort to draft her as a presidential candidate in 2012. She can be coy about it, test the waters (who else is going to run) and jump in if she deems the playing field is beatable.
One problem with this, of course - she’s a quitter. And that will stick to her and be used by her GOP opponents and the Dems afterward (if she survives). She would have been better off citing the need to be a full-time mom (with the occasional out-of-town junket!). I predict that this will not play out well for those beyond the “base.”
from cnn, (i was in the kitchen, away from the tv) it was mentioned that she hasn’t finished any job she was elected to. it seemed that she would run for the next one before finishing the first. could anyone comfirm?
Nah, whatever we think of their opinions, doing what Rush, etc., do, that takes preparation and the ability to speak in coherent sentences off the cuff. Palin can do neither of those things.
If that had been the plan, or for that matter if there were any long-range strategy of any kind behind this, the announcement wouldn’t have been this rushed, improvised thing on a day when minimum press coverage was assured.
Maybe we’ll get a leak about the real (and probably tawdry) reason soon, maybe later, but this is the end of her political career. Nothing else fits the way she left it.
Could she do a call-in show? Prolly not. But this is the Bush syndrome - constantly underestimating someone who appears to be quite limited, but in fact has some political smarts. If she did a call-in show, the callers would be screened and would be the Sarah fanatics.
I have a very low opinion of Sarah Palin intellectually and politically. But I wouldn’t underestimate her savvy in some quarters. Here in Texas she has unwavering support from some people because she can fire a gun! I actually heard someone argue that she is better suited for office because she can kill her own dinner, and Obama doesn’t know how to fire a gun. This somehow translates to we can beat the Koreans yay! :rolleyes:
Another caller said that she’s a breath of fresh air, innocent to politics. Of course the meme during the campaign was that she had more executive experience than Obama.
Yes, her political career is over.
But does Sarah Palin know that? Don’t misoverestimate her, as a former President might say.
Bwahahaha, she is a 100% political animal. In fact shed may be the purest representation of someone who is a politican first and someone of principles second. She is so uninterested in policy and the world and everything that tends to make politicians want to be politicians in the first palce, it is almost laughable. She sought politics for the sake of policits only, she has no desire to help her country or her state, she only seeks power for her ego.
In her mind, this move allows her to stay “political” without having to actually do anything that is required, know the issues. She can speak in platitudes and Bible verses till the cows come home and thats what makes her a fantastic rallying point for the extreme right-wing and a completely incapable, gong show contestant for the rest of us.
The question is does she realize this and, if so, does she care. I know I wouldn’t love it if more than half the country thought that of me, and would probably self assess. (bolding mine)
It’s actually pretty easy to utterly dismiss everyone who disagrees with you as being complete morons and thus, holding irrelevent opinions - even if those people constitute the vast majority.
I speak from personal experience.
I just finally watched the video of her resignation, and read the transcript. In the transcript, which starts before the video started, she said something about the fact that these ethics charges she had to defend against have cost the state a lot of time and money to deal with, and that she and her husband personally have a half-million in legal fees to pay. Now I don’t buy her argument that a lame-duck governor costs the state a ton of money…what would Parnell be, if he decides not to run for reelection?..but I can see where she and her husband may have taken a look at what all this is costing them, and whatever nasty attack was made on her baby, and decided that perhaps it would be better for her family if she got out of politics. Why you would give up a paying job with those kind of bills to pay, I don’t know, unless she has a better offer. I really think she may disappear for a while until her kids are older. I think perhaps that would be the wisest choice, and perhaps her husband is insisting. Wouldn’t that be fresh, and novel, and actually increase her viability as a future candidate? If we can work past this whole quitter vibe, I mean.
“My husband told me to?” Yeah, that’ll work. Go over big, for sure.
If the man has to fork over money for legal fees…if his children are being attacked and ridiculed…and if she really wants to play the traditional family values card…yeah it could go over big! Why shouldn’t her husband have a say in this? If Michelle Obama can have a say in Barack’s decision, why can’t a husband have an opinion?
I missed the press conference where she gave that as the reason. I heard ‘eye on the balls’ and ‘partys greater good’ and ‘insulting the family’, not my husband wants me to end this.
She didn’t say she had $5000,000 in legal bills. She said she and Todd estimated it would cost that to ‘set the record straight’.
I don’t know why this point bugs me. CNN and Fox repeated the “$500.000 in legal bills” statements all weekend and knowing what a ‘bender of the truth’ Palin has been in the past, I just don’t believe that she owes that much- just that she ‘could spend’ that much.
I saw one source that said it was more like 10,000 and that she’d billed the state of Alaska.
Of course a husband has the right to an opinion! He also has the right to remain silent.
It’s also pretty easy to make wild-ass generalizations, add a dash of argumentum ad populum and just a hint of anecdotal evidence.
How about “Todd and I have discussed this thoroughly, and we agreed that…”