Saturday, July 4, 2009

Sara Palin doesn't seem concerned

by Smitty

Politico has the story and the tepid review.
But asked exactly what stories the governor was criticizing, Palin spokeswoman Meg Stapleton said Palin wasn’t referring to any specific news or TV account but rather the speculation and questions about what may have been her motivation for resigning.
As for the “higher calling” Palin referred to, Stapleton said the governor was just generally referring to what she sees as a move up in public life.

Here is the full text, interspersed with commentary:
Happy 4th of July from Alaska!
Today at 4:55pm

On this Independence Day, I am so very proud of all those who have chosen to serve our great nation and I honor their selflessness and the sacrifices of their families, too.

If I may, I would like to take a moment to reflect on the last 24 hours and share my thoughts with you.

First, I want to thank you for your support and hard work on the values we share. Those values led me to the decision my family and I made. Yesterday, my family and I announced a decision that is in Alaska’s best interest and it always feels good to do what is right. We have accomplished more during this one term than most governors do in two – and I am proud of the great team that helped to build these wonderful successes. Energy independence and national security, fiscal restraint, smaller government, and local control have been my priorities and will remain my priorities.

For months now, I have consulted with friends and family, and with the Lieutenant Governor, about what is best for our wonderful state. I even made a few administrative changes over that course in time in preparation for yesterday. We have accomplished so much and there’s much more to do, but my family and I determined after prayerful consideration that sacrificing my title helps Alaska most. And once I decided not to run for re-election, my decision was that much easier – I’ve never been one to waste time or resources. Those who know me know this is the right decision and obvious decision at that, including Senator John McCain. I thank him for his kind, insightful comments.

OK, so it wasn't sudden, has no health overtones. If there is scandal afoot, you wouldn't expect a hint here. However, it does seem to hint at Big Plans.
The response in the main stream media has been most predictable, ironic, and as always, detached from the lives of ordinary Americans who are sick of the “politics of personal destruction”. How sad that Washington and the media will never understand; it’s about country. And though it's honorable for countless others to leave their positions for a higher calling and without finishing a term, of course we know by now, for some reason a different standard applies for the decisions I make. But every American understands what it takes to make a decision because it’s right for all, including your family.

Sarah: we can't mock BHO for singling out Hannity and Limbaugh if you condescend to notice the kneepad media. If you depart the high ground of George W. Bush, do so with faintly ironic humor: "My media chums," or "That swell Katie Couric." Let the use of Leave it to Beaver adjectives be a signal that you agree with us that the mainstream media are hardly qualified to sweep a floor.
I shared with you yesterday my heartfelt and candid reasons for this change; I’ve never thought I needed a title before one’s name to forge progress in America. I am now looking ahead and how we can advance this country together with our values of less government intervention, greater energy independence, stronger national security, and much-needed fiscal restraint. I hope you will join me. Now is the time to rebuild and help our nation achieve greatness!

Another "nobody asked me, but...": can we minimize the personal pronoun? A major component of the decadence of contemporary politics is the overemphasis on the personal. You can score a cosmic win if you drive the discussion away from Alinsky Rule 12. Yes, much is about you, for reasons of family and appearance. Yet the first woman elected POTUS shall have been metaphorically crucified a thousand times. Yes, it's highly personal, on the receive end, but please minimize making it personal on the transmit end.
John 15:18 "If the world hate you, ye know that it hated me before it hated you.". Also, the sky is blue. Speaking truth makes you more, not less, hated.
God bless you! And I look forward to making a difference – with you!


As long as it's a Constitutional, Federalist difference, great, lady. Full support. It doesn't seem like this at all, but if it's merely trading one megalomaniac for one with longer hair, then it's a difference making little difference.
The country has to realize that there is only one party: Progressive, with its Democratic and Republican wings. One can admire the clever device of appearing to maintain two parties: the underlings are probably convinced they are in actual competition. But they're re-arranging the ore load on the Edmund Fitzgerald.
Make it about "We the People" and "50 States United", please.


  1. Maybe I'm tired and I read this too fast but I can't tell if you support her, are quite skeptical of her motives or are annoyed.

    Also please explain and/or define the following captcha: "jigniff".

  2. Smitty, sometimes I don't know about you.

    Seems I've heard or read this type of criticism before. I thought I detected a certain understated "I like her BUT ... " in a couple of your other posts but this pretty much confirms my suspicion.

    It's almost as if I'm reading "Hot Air" but when I look at the masthead it doesn't say that.

    Now, tell us who you really, really want to see as POTUS. We can take it. Dont' hide behind the "BUT".

  3. "but if it's merely trading one megalomaniac for one with longer hair, then it's a difference making little difference."
    Ahhhh, Smitty, now you are beginning to smell that smell...
    Her pathetic exploitation of her family is what turns me off the most. I'm sorry. but I don't particularly vote for a candidate AND their family.
    Yes, she is the megalomaniac you fear she might be.
    And she's a cheap, run-of-the-mill megalomaniac who panders to what is frankly a talk-radio Conservative sensibility.
    Constant references to "true-Americans" and "real patriots" is sooo old hat. And there is nothing a tacky and Texas league as complaining about the MSM and then insisting it had nothing to do with her quitting her post. She's thin skinned.
    Higher calling? Yes, her personal ambitions is that calling.
    Her supporters are a serious threat to our nation....

  4. @Y4E,
    Her supporters are a serious threat to our nation....
    Whether she amounts to half the threat posed by the current administration remains to be seen.

  5. @Red and prairiemain,
    Oh, I voted Thompson in the VA primary, a purely symbolic pleasure, as he'd exited the race by then.
    The chief grip against Fred--his heart wasn't in the race--was totally a feature as far as I was concerned.
    Having a Federalist, non-megalomaniac (not to accuse Sarah of either in the slightest) in the Oval Office would be a refreshing course alteration.
    And I did say, emphasis added:
    As long as it's a Constitutional, Federalist difference, great, lady. Full support.
    I also fully support BHO's Constitutionally-based undertakings, on those occasions they peek out. He's the POTUS, and you have to respect the office, if not always the actions of the occupant.
    No, really: we've had a personality-driven, "Yes We Can" campaign in this country. Let's not see Sarah go that route. I think her faith is strong enough to temper the temptation.

  6. I think Sarah is just disgusted with the unprecedented smear campaign against her and her family. She is taking her marbles and going home. Who can blame her.

  7. I am 100% in favor of the actions that Sarah Palin took. I see more character in that act than I do in ALL of the elected officals that we have now. Too many times I have seen politicans campaign for 2 or 3 years while neglecting the job they were elected to do in the first place. Everyone of them does it. Barack Obama ran for POTUS before he had finished his first term. No one criticizes him. Did Joe Biden finish his elected term before becoming Vice President. Did Hillary finish her term before becoming Secretary of State?

    Sarah Palin may not be as intelligent as someone else, but that same thing applies to the majority of people in the country. The majority of the people voted for a man who had no experience. Thyis same man who refuses to prove where hye was born. One of the most corrupt men alive in the world today that is ripping off the American people and turning our nation in a 3rd world nation. A man who is weak and undecisive who does not have one original thought in his mind. This same man doesn't realize there are not 57 states. The same man who promised no new taxes on anyone making under 250,000 a year.

    The only ones who have proven their stupidity day in and day out are the ones who blindly follow Obama and whatever the media tells them to.

    I am universal in my condemnation. The majority of the Republicans are no better. They lie cheat and steal as well as any Democrat. They are elected to office and then campaign while in office. They are not doing the job they were paid to do either.

    I would love for my employer to keep paying me while I spend my day trying to talk to other employees and share holders about how they should give me my bosses job.

    I admire Sarah Palins courage and strength of character. Her common sense. She may not know everything there is to know about what is going on in the world, but that is something that can be lewarned. You can't learn strength of character. You can't learn courage. You can't learn common sense. You either have it or you don't.

    Steve O

  8. The biggest problem we have as a collective nation is we put our fate in the hands of politicians instead of being involved to the point we make a difference.
    To complain some public face "Needs to be this way." or "Needs to know this or that." or "Needs to have a particular personality." is irrelevant. The entire system is hopelessly corrupt and until we have a justice system that corrals the corruption we are doomed.

  9. "you have to respect the office, if not always the actions of the occupant"

    Uh, no.

    "The biggest problem we have as a collective nation is we put our fate in the hands of politicians instead of being involved to the point we make a difference."


    So as far as your concerned the jury's still out on Sarah. That's fair. Same here.

  10. Federalism? Constitution? Don't you understand? We're past that. Now for Marius and the reforms and murder of the Grachii and the Despotism of Sulla.

    All politics are now about Populares and Optimates. Contests over the levers of power, the existence of the levers long since being accepted. Choose wisely.

  11. @Doc_Savage,
    There are those who wish us to be past that, but only if "We the People" permit it.

  12. Palin’s move puts yet more pressure on Obama to finally get some results, as the soaring rhetoric isn’t hypnotizing the plebes like it used to. This week Helen Thomas, Colin Powell, and Warren Buffet all turned on him. Polls are looking droopy for The One lately.

    Obama’s porkulus program is a train wreck, all it’s done is bump interest rates and tank the dollar. We are being laughed at by bad guys like Tehran, Pyongyang, and Al Qaida who amazingly turned-down Barack’s friend-requests.

    Palin could trounce him in 2012, when Americans would vote for the Gipper-in-Heels in droves- while begging for lower taxes, free enterpise, a defense posture with some backbone… an end to the radical, anti-American nightmare we’ve got now.

    Go get ‘em Sarah-

  13. The country has to realize that there is only one party: Progressive, with its Democratic and Republican wings. One can admire the clever device of appearing to maintain two parties

    Excellent point, Smitty. One party makes (token) tax cuts and runs up a deficit - the other eliminates the token gesture. Both see no problem in continuing along the same ruinous path of easy credit and cripppling debt, jobs lost overseas and a vast widening between the ultra-rich and the ultra-poor...ultra because, in many ways, it's more difficult to live in poverty in the middle of a concrete jungle than a natural one.

    The fact is, I just don't see [Ex]Governor Palin doing aught but steering the ship of state down the same progressive path with a cheerful smile and a Lowryian sparkle in her eye. More farming out of contracts to party supporters and lobbyists. More corruption. More waste. Less time to try and fix things. Whichever party we elect, we seem to always get more of the same. Daniel Larison for president?


  14. Not "Anonymous", dammit. Posted by K~Bob (who finally figured out that by using IE--very irritating--and lying about being Anonymous to post something, it'll actually go through):

    The country has to realize that there is only one party: Progressive, with its Democratic and Republican wings.

    That's a really annoying concept. It's built on the nearly useless notion that there is an actual "left" and "right". Those two terms are merely catchphrases, which try to help navigate the difficult-to-categorize notion of "who's side are you on, anyway?"

    Political parties are an unfortunate necessity in our system. In reality, there is no actual "side" because all the politicians are in it mostly for the role, the power, or some (possibly ideological) purpose known only to themselves. But parties do offer major distinctions, despite lack of guarantee that any member agrees with all of them.

    Clearly, all groups of three or more suffer from lack of purity, when it comes to "sides." That doesn't mean both major political parties are "progressive" or any other thing you want to call them.

    I'm not a Republican, nor a conservative, but I can see a bright line difference between the ideology of someone as bizarrely out of touch with the Republican base as is General Powell, and rank and file Democrats. It doesn't mean "they're all progressives," it means organizations suck, but are necessary if you want to win.

    That's why the puffed-out chest and the "well, let's see if she can meet my stringent qualifications" line is kind of silly (the concept, not you personally, Smitty). It's a matter of logic that you can do no better than look at the candidate's track record, their list of positions, and the rumors generated about them. Palin's are right out in the open, so no "waiting" is necessary.

    Republicans failed to get behind anyone early. The infighting became nasty, and the weak nominee was the "winner" of the process.
    The choice is clear: one either gets in the game, sits on the sidelines, or occupies the realm of the "journalist." Both of the latter choices are useless for winning elections, regardless of the honor in holding them.