As an Alaskan i just want an effective governor. is she crazy?
i don't think so but i think she is ill advised or showing that her judgment is not sound. I think she has abandoned every alaskan's interest, to follow this pipe dream of hers.

My initial thoughts were, it's a bonehead move to resign, if she's running for President in 2012.  Now, having heard some analysis on the news, I surmise that she is not running for anything.  I forget who said, "Political suicide", but that's what resigning as governor is for her.  Actually, more like political euthenasia.  Her political career is over.

The stage for the 2012 election is already turning into a circus.

There's a lot of speculation why Palin resigned before her term was up.  Many think it's to free herself up for higher office. 

I don't think we'll see her run for office again, unless someone comes in and does a complete personality makeover on her.  If she can't handle being governor of Alaska how can she handle the office of president?

My guess is she thought winning an election was just the same as winning a beauty pageant.  When you win everyone loves you, wants your autograph, wants to have their picture taken with you, etc.  All you have to do is look pretty and smile.  She's a ditz.

Her countless clueless comments proved she knew nothing about politics ("What does a VP do?")  You have to know SOMETHING in order to be an effective politician, even in Alaska.  Even her resignation speech was a mess.  Who could follow what she was saying?

She embarrassed the voters of Alaska by showing the world they voted on good looks and a folksy image.  I guess it didn't hurt to be a moose hunter either.  I don't think they were too happy the person the voted in as governor made them look stupid.

She quit because couldn't handle the pressure of political office.  Now she knows what it's like to have people critical of you and your life.

But someone will come along with a wad of cash and get her to put her face out in the public eye again.  CNN said she draws a lot of people, even it it's only to see a car wreck.

Julie

You don't quit a lower office halfway though to run for higher office.  Or, if you do, know that it does not work.

So, ask a simple question.

What exactly makes power hungry publicity whores leave the power and the spotlight? 

If your thinking - "gee Kat, I've never heard of such a thing happening in my life."  You're probably right.  It doesn't. 

If you're thinking - "gee Kat, perhaps she is leaving to find more power and more publicity."  You might have a winner there.  So she could do speaking tours, book deals and get a slot on Faux News and become a female Pat Buchanan, make huge amounts of money (compared to what the Gov of Alaska can legally make) and become not just the Gov of Alaska (who up to this point in US history was one of the most unnoticed persons in US politics - I mean really, name me one other Gov of Alaska?) but a STAR of network TV (OK, cable, but at least its TV, and there is very little that people like her will NOT do to be on TV) while preaching to the choir of her most devoted wingnuts for big bucks.  That I could see. 

But, if you thought like I do - always look on the dark side of life - then your first thought, as mine was - was - "Who's got what on her?"  Alaska, unnoticed among its closest competitors (Jersey and Illinois) is one very corrupt little state.  Few people, huge amounts of money making resources that require state aid and help to get to and (comparatively to say Iowa or Mississippi) awash in money they have had lots of good charges against political types (including their last senator) over the years dealing with the routine political money crimes, embezzlement, extortion, sweetheart deals, quid pro quo arrangements, kickbacks, and bribes.

So, I think that's the most likely way to go.  It makes sense the easy way, which is often the true way.  They got her - or even more likely, her hubby, who is kind of a creepy backroom guy in a snowmobile parka - on something real.  Any, and indeed all, of those crimes come with an almost mandatory income tax evasion charge, which gets the Feds into the game.

It's probably way easy to pull some stuff past the state guardians of Alaska, but when the Feds get you in their sights, you're going down.  Their power and resources are for all purposes limitless, and make no mistake about it, their people are very good and once they bite down they are like a pit bull with no lipstick, they don't let go.  Ask anyone who has been involved in a federal investigation how easy it is to get out of it - but you're going to have to write to them in jail I bet.

[ed. note:  For the sake of comparison, SF has a 60% rate for unsolved homicides, and a low conviction rate for just about everything else.  The rate of conviction for people arrested by the FBI is right around 95%, meaning, that when the FBI arrests you, they have you dead to rights, it's as close to airtight as a criminal charge gets.]

The timing is very, very suspicious too.  A deader news time - Friday afternoon before a 3 day holiday - is the traditional place to try to bury news you don't want others to really notice.  That not where you make some important announcement, its where you try to hide the bad stuff.  So since I tend not to think that major stuff like this happens without a reason, I'm looking for an obvious reason, and the obvious reason is - scandal.

Or, she really is major league weird.  That might work too.




You have to know SOMETHING in order to be an effective politician, even in Alaska.*

*Offer void in Texas and California

In the scandal department, I have never believed that Trig was Sarah's baby.  A person as visible as a governor keeping a pregnancy secret?  Then flying from Dallas to Alaska to give birth, after her water broke?

It's really really going to take some self discipline for me to get used to the fact that moving in the LGBT world means I'm in a tiny 3% or so minority on every political subject.

I think I'll keep my head down and my mouth shut, lol.

Laura, what is it that professional gamblers, physicists and historians all know and put into use?  Play the odds.

If you are betting the NBA championships, don't bet against the Phil Jackson team.  Though there are circumstances that might have the pencil fall up and not down, bet on it falling down.  If a major political figure up and quits for no reason - bet there is a very real reason.  And in this case, its not political genius.

Historically that reason has been either: a) they can cash in, or b) they are in deep doo-doo.

Hell, Mark Stanford still has not quit and he was caught dead to rights.  Nor did Vitter (and he was paying hookers to play infantilism games with him - wow).  So something very weird is going on.  Or, its the dough Roper.

And that's not pub/dem, lib or conservative, its across the board.

QuoteSo something very weird is going on.

Oh, I believe that. And I'm not at all convinced that there isn't a scandal coming (although I'm likewise convinced that it would not necessarily be one she's guilty of - since there have been MANY scadals so far but no finding of fault).

I'm less convinced she's setting up a run for the presidency. That doesn't add up. My best guess is she won't make that run until her daughters are all grown or close to it.

That said, she got where she is BY being unconventional. And her calling card is "mom first" - so i would also not be at all surprised if she is simply saying "I won't put my family through more of this crap" with the Letterman incident being the decisive moment.

What you said about "cashing in" is almost like predicting tomorrow's sunrise. Every report says she is still a rock star in GOP circles. Even at that dinner party that some though was FUBAR because of the mix up over whether she would attend, when she did show - even though not speaking - she was the darling of the crowd.

there is no logical reason why a person would NOT "cash in" on that popularity with a book deal and high paid speeches and the like. No reason, short of quitting politics altogether, why you would not build up a reserve of political IOUs (like Guliani did for the 4 years previous to 2008) by stumping around the country for 2010 candidates.

That's the OBVIOUS thing to do and being critical of that would be nothing but just a function of criticizing a person because they are on the wrong side of the issues.

now - if the argument is that she quit so that she could cash in (financially and politically) then yes, that's a legitimate criticism. but it's also a rigged game because it can't be proven either way.

If she quit for legitimate personal reasons, she would cash in
If she quit for selfish political motives, she will cash in.

So either way her defenders and her detractors both get to choose and believe the spin that suits there preconceptions.

There's no reason in that.


The thing I was actually referring to though wasn't your analysis.

The thing that just makes me shake my head (and I see this on other boards from right wing people too so I'm not picking on my sisters here) - is how easily people make pretty ...unusual...assumptions and state them as if obvious. It shows up on blogs and stuff and gets repeated and noised about by those who share the same political position without much critical thinking.

I'd give examples but that would be instigating against particular posters and I don't want that kind of tension.

I just wish people could say, of whatever politician - "I don't like their views and I don't want them to have power" instead of calling them "idiots" or "embarrassments" or whatever.

Maybe I'm living in a dream world on that though.

---

Post Merge: July 04, 2009, 12:42:44 PM

---

Quote from: heatherrose on July 04, 2009, 12:19:24 PM

Welcome to my corner of the "Community"

~Heather pats the seat beside her's~

You can come and sit beside me, if you like.

*Gets comfy

Good company makes up for small numbers

there is no logical reason why a person would NOT "cash in" on that popularity with a book deal and high paid speeches and the like. No reason, short of quitting politics altogether, why you would not build up a reserve of political IOUs (like Guliani did for the 4 years previous to 2008) by stumping around the country for 2010 candidates.

Bopth Laura and Tekla make good points. I'm split 50/50. It's either a. LARGE scandal, as in the Feds are moving in. Or b. shes positioning herself to collect IOU's by way of the 2010 (mid-term) election cycle.

If it's the latter than the old Southwest's  ad tagline comes to mind, she's "now free to move about the country."

Running for Prez from either Alaska or Hawaii is just a logistical nightmare. Palin could fly around the US and headline funraisers/rallies for Gov, Senate, and House candidates.

The aspect that points to scandal, or at least oddball, is her resigning. Why resign? She could have announced on Monday the 6th that she wouldn't seek re-election. Serve out her term and be able to help out other candidates. Or have waited to resign until near the Alaskan primary date. That would have added legititamcy to the Lt. Gov campaign.

Or, why didn't she re-sign and announce her candidacy for the GOP nom. for Murkowskis Senate seat. That too would put her in a position to stump for fellow GOP candidates.

BTW for the Palin detractors. Ditch the anti-small state bias. VP Biden, the man a heartbeat from the Presidency, is from Delaware. I used to live there. Its a very samll state in both size and population. Keep in mind Howard Dean, the former Gov from Vermont, made a strong run in 2004. Sen. Daschle was the Sen. Majority Leader, he was from North or South Dakota. I could add to this list. But enough said. Either that or start a drive to push out VP Biden.

For now though one thing is certain. From both the left and right camps.
Palin Derangement Syndrome will continue.

Maybe 22 hours of sunlight fried her brain.

Lisa, that could be. But given that you live in MS and I live in FL. I can only begin to think what others thoughts are regarding the long hot summers on our brains.

Look, as a large "D" member of the Democratic Party, a real life advocate and worker for trade union membership and workers rights believe me, there is no person I'd rather see be the Republican nominee than Sara Palin, unless it would be Michelle Bachman.

I guess I just have to quote my favorite comedian, Lewis Black, and ask "What the F*** were you thinking!?"  (WTFWYT!?)

It's kinda like that WTFWYT!? moment from the death of Michael Jackson.  Remember how within hours - hours I tell 'ya - members of his family pulled up not one, but two trucks to the house to get stuff out?  Sure you do.  And who could blame them, what with all the money he owed and stuff, they had to get their hands on it first.  But, to take all the furniture and stuff, AND LEAVE ALL THE DRUGS?  WTFWYT!?  Had it been me, I would have made sure - most likely by doing it myself - that that house didn't have as much as an aspirin in it. Much less a few garbage bags full of the stuff.

So, accused of being a political lightweight with no real experience, she quits half-way though her first term of her first real elected office so she could position herself for running for POTUS.  WTFWYT!?

I mean, there is something of the hysterical about the 'Pubs talking about what an awesome speaker she is, given that last go round.  She sounded - as others have pointed out - rambling, disjointed and more than a bit off center.  I've watched and listened to her when she has been on her game, and this was not that moment.  She sounds rushed, under pressure and the speech as a whole is incoherent. And the final quote was not just wrong, it was 180 degrees off base as it was delivered more or less to MacArthur, NOT by him.

If it was to cash in (remember she's not 'selling out' she is 'buying in') then more power to her, but why not just come out and say it?  "I've decided its in the best interest of my family to give up my low paying job in Alaska and make millions elsewhere."  Hell, I'd even applaud that and it would raise my estimation for both her intelligence and honesty.  But old 'plain speaking Sara' was so vague about her reasons and her plans you would have thought that it was Bob Dylan answering a personal question in an interview.*

The timing, the method and the manner all suggest something that when it's happened in the past, tends to turn out very badly. That's just the odds.  When a politician says "I'm doing this for my family" what they really mean tends to wind up being "so they don't have to visit me in jail."

For sure, her supporters deserved something better than this, and to make a hunting analogy (which I'm sure she'd love) she just gave her detractors a hella lot of ammo with which to attack her.

It's the Mafia Don deal, if you pile up enough charges, sooner or later you're going to get evidence of one crime.  So, When elected officials have to spend so much time and money fighting allegations of ethical misconduct, sooner or later, one of them sticks.  And nothing leaves a trail quite like money does.

And, to be sure, because I am.  Those people in D.C. now - the Obama people -- they play hardball, they play for keeps, they understand this is about running an Empire (a tottering one albeit) and not a beauty contest, and having control over the entire law enforcement of the federal government I would be shocked to find out that they didn't use it like the big city political types they all are.  They don't have to invent it, just use it.  And the Feds have been all over Alaska for years now, they already took out a sitting Senator, I'm sure that in a very small pot, that slime gets to everyone.  And for those who have not been following Alaska politics, the feds indited and convinced a lot of people up there BEFORE Obama took over.

----------

And the comparison with Biden and Dean is kinda unique, yes they come from small states, but those states are in the heart of the largest population center in the U.S. - and remember, both of them DID NOT win the nomination.  Moreover, the VP job (offer not valid with Dick Cheney) is not much.  It's only an issue, when you have someone like McCain, who is not in the best of health, where his health was an issue, and where there was a far greater than average chance that she could have wound up in the Oval Office.

like Guliani did for the 4 years previous to 2008
Also suffers as comparison, as he didn't win either, matter of fact, wasn't he pretty much the first guy out?

-----------------

*In what is pretty much one of gold standard for vague answers, Bob in his Playboy interview, when asked what his song were about replied:
DYLAN: . . . I do know what my songs are about.
PLAYBOY: And what's that?
DYLAN: Oh, some are about four minutes; some are about five, and some, believe it or not, are about eleven or twelve.
PLAYBOY: Can't you be a bit more informative?
DYLAN: Nope.

Honorable mention to this, John Lennon replying to the question 'How did you find America?" answered, "Turned left at Greenland."

And the comparison with Biden and Dean is kinda unique, yes they come from small states, but those states are in the heart of the largest population center in the U.S. - and remember, both of them DID NOT win the nomination.  Moreover, the VP job (offer not valid with Dick Cheney) is not much.  It's only an issue, when you have someone like McCain, who is not in the best of health, where his health was an issue, and where there was a far greater than average chance that she could have wound up in the Oval Office.

I'll clarify my point a bit here. Dosent it seem in the US that we get blinded by short-term results? Be it business or politics? In politics the Dems might be able to put the kabash on Palin over the small state issue. But what happens in 2016, providing Obama wins '12, when a Dem emerges from say the Dakotas or Montana for instance.

like Guliani did for the 4 years previous to 2008
Also suffers as comparison, as he didn't win either, matter of fact, wasn't he pretty much the first guy out?

On a personal note, I voted for "Rudy" in the FL primary.

Interestingly enough the Dems seem to like the small state people - Clinton from Arkansas, Carter from Georgia, while the R's have not been able to win (not counting Ike, who could have been running against Jesus and still won) since the 1920s without someone from either California or Texas. (Nixon, Reagan, Bush, Bush)  You need a real base if your going to win as a minority party. 

Leadership positions in the House and the Senate have more to do with internal power within those bodies than power on a national scale.

QuoteThe aspect that points to scandal, or at least oddball, is her resigning. Why resign? She could have announced on Monday the 6th that she wouldn't seek re-election. Serve out her term and be able to help out other candidates. Or have waited to resign until near the Alaskan primary date. That would have added legititamcy to the Lt. Gov campaign.

In her statement, she mad  the point that the conventional political tactic was to do just that. Stay in office doing a half-assed job and jetting about the country on the states payroll serving the person's own interest and said she wouldn't be one to milk that role.

Plus, from the statement, she seems to be thinking that the drumbeat of opposition trying desperately to find some way to hang her was also a drain both on the state's funds and the family's personal finances. i doubt that will stop happening but at least it seems to be some part of her thinking.

Which poses the question - so many on the left keep saying that nothing would be better for Democrats than a palin nomination yet at the same time the left seems hell bent on destroying her far above and beyond any other Republican in the country.

IF she's a gift to Dems because she's such a joke, why do they hate her so?

Quote
Or, why didn't she re-sign and announce her candidacy for the GOP nom. for Murkowskis Senate seat. That too would put her in a position to stump for fellow GOP candidates.

Reportedly there was a comment on Twitter that basically said "more news to come, stay tuned" so there may be another chapter soon.

Quote
BTW for the Palin detractors. Ditch the anti-small state bias. VP Biden, the man a heartbeat from the Presidency, is from Delaware. I used to live there. Its a very samll state in both size and population. Keep in mind Howard Dean, the former Gov from Vermont, made a strong run in 2004. Sen. Daschle was the Sen. Majority Leader, he was from North or South Dakota. I could add to this list

No greater example than Clinton - Arkansas. Not just because it's a low-key rural state but because the governor of Arkansas is constitutionally a very weak executive.

---

Post Merge: July 04, 2009, 04:13:37 PM

---

Quote from: michellesofl on July 04, 2009, 02:49:00 PM
Lisa, that could be. But given that you live in MS and I live in FL. I can only begin to think what others thoughts are regarding the long hot summers on our brains.

Lisa is a fellow MS girl?

Cool!

That makes three of us I know about here...

Reportedly there was a comment on Twitter that basically said "more news to come, stay tuned" so there may be another chapter soon.

If Palin is thinking a Pres run in 2012, doing so as a sitting Sen would put her in a good position. I point back to the logistical nightmare that a run from Alaska or Hawaii would entail. Its a four to five flight just to reach Seattle or LAX from those states.

I know its cold in Alaska, but if you quit the Gov job 1/2 through how are you going to get elected to the Senate, particularly of the people think you're only doing it to get to be President in two more years?  That all but impossible to do in states where people are used to that.

No, she committed political suicide, the only question is why.

Oh poor Sara.  Oh she is getting savaged in the press.  Poor girl.  Never happened to a Liberal Democrat would it?  Not to Lyndon Johnson, Jimmy Carter, Al Gore, Mike Dukakis, or John Kerry did it?   (And to be fair, Gore, Dukakis and Kerry, much like Sara, set themselves up for it.) 

All she had to do (and just about everyone, right, left and center said it) was to go back to Alaska, do a good job at being Gov, study policy, get good advisers and come back as a New Sara in 2 years.  There is a special level of obscurity reserved for the VP on a losing ticket and she could have benefited from that. Don't believe me?  Real quick, who ran with Dukakis?  See, I'm right. (Lloyd Bensten, BTW - and yes, I had to look it up).  But is was her - and her very vocal fan club - who worked to keep her in the spotlight.  Which was odd, considering the circular firing squad they've been keeping up since November, laying low and waiting till the shooting stops is the only logical thing to do.

And its not just the Obama crowd that is playing hardball for political keeps right now.  It was a fellow 'Pub that brought out all the stuff on Stanford for the press to follow up on.  Those people dumping on Sara in Vanity Fair, they are all Republican political operatives.  It's not the Dems that are shouting RINO all over the place trying to get all the McCain and Romney supporters out of the party right now.  So it's not some 'liberal media' deal at all.

And the reason I want her to run is because I think she defeats herself, making the election a walk.  Same reason that when the Dems nominated Kerry and Dukakis, Republicans all over the United States opened the top shelf champagne.  Happy days were here again for them indeed.

I think that, not just because I oppose her political viewpoints and ideology (and I do, I do), but because I look at what she says, who she appeals to, and how she comes across and think that she will only appeal to a very narrow part (but important part) of the Republican Party and will - if she hasn't already with all these shenanigans - alienate everyone else.  She has no crossover vote at all.  (Remember, no Reagan Democrats, no Reagan victory).  She would get fewer Democratic votes than Dick Cheney I bet - she's just that far off base - and at least you could vote for Cheney knowing 'he gets things done and the trains run on time' and all that.  And we know that not even with three, four, five or whatever heart attacks he never quit.

Compare her with Reagan?  You're kidding me.  He was a master of public speaking that made everyone feel good, yet said nothing he could be tied down on.  Who could oppose 'morning in America' - everybody likes morning and America, so it was a sure fire winner.  Reagan also served two - rather difficult at that - terms as Governor at a time when the State of California did about as good as its ever going to do.  And quit?  The Gipper?  The more criticism - and his kids came in for a fair share too - he got, the more determined he got.

You can talk all you want about 'no politics as usual' but as far as I can see the system works more or less like it always did.  So any 'outside the box' thinking is just one more road to failure.  Obama was nothing new (except he was black) but his campaign was not some bold departure, but rather, it was winning by the book.  There is no other road to be President other than win the nomination in such a way that some people of the other party might vote for you when its all said and done.  And, given current events, there is no way that the next nomination cycle for the Republican Party - much like the Democrats were in the late 70s and early 80s - is going to resemble throwing chum to a bunch of very hungry sharks, and all that is going to be internal.  Liberals and left wing types will have nothing to do with - other than open the top shelf champagne and sing happy days are here again - causing or making.

I knew about Bentsen - without looking it up. i also can name a couple of other Alasaka governors (though I doubt I'm spelling Murkowski right) - Frank Murkoswski and Tony Knowles

Quote
And the reason I want her to run is because I think she defeats herself, making the election a walk.  Same reason that when the Dems nominated Kerry and Dukakis, Republicans all over the United States opened the top shelf champagne.  Happy days were here again for them indeed.

Exactly true. but there's where the contrast comes in. the Republicans who knew Kerry wold be an easy mark didn't pull out all the stops to try to kill Kerry's chances of getting the nomination.

As much as i hate to keep making the analogy, because it implies equal ability - the Palin Derangement has a lot more in common with the way that both Democrats AND Rockefeller Republicans used to loath Reagan and do everything they could to discredit him before (and often even after) 1980.

QuoteSo any 'outside the box' thinking is just one more road to failure.

Quite likely. I can't make a definitive comment until I see what her immediate next step is. But I DO see an incredible amount of arrogant "She's dead, I KNOW she's dead" sort of commentary from the left. Politics isn't THAT predictable.

I also pretty strongly disagree with the notion that she has NO crossover appeal either, but that ultimately comes down to opinions.

But I'm reminded of the New York Socialite who was stunned that Nixon won in '68 because "none of the people I know voted for him"

A lot of times ones political views are reflective of the people they associate with. I can't presume to guess how many Democrats in NY or RI or Maine or Oregon would crossover and vote for her....but I can tell you for a certain fact that if the 2008 election had been Obama v. Palin that a MASSIVE amount of rural Democrats across the south and in places like Nebraska and Indiana would have crossed the aisle to vote for her. Especially if she had been a candidate for 2 years like he was and she'd had a chance to define herself instead of being viewed through two months of "full court press"

Speaking of which - a tangent-


A big part of why she was perceived as a lightweight is that she was thrown into a national campaign in which she had not been at all involved or prepared for with 2 months to go. Do you think Obama STARTED considering his run for president having already thoroughly studied all the national issues and prepared positions he could intellectually defend? No. He knew when he decided to run he needed to be prepared and he took the time to get prepared, and then had almost two years to refine and perfect how he presented those views. that's something Palin didn't have AT ALL.
If Obama had yanked Sebelius out of Kansas for his running mate she'd have had the same issues. (albeit his camp would probably have prepped her a lot better than McCain's people did Palin but still, it's a "cold start")

And that's to say nothing of both McCain and Biden having spent decades handling those issues.

OF COURSE you throw Palin into that and she's going to come off as unprepared by contrast.