One of the most interesting side-effects of seismic, sudden change within a society is that it almost always creates a counter-culture bent on either resisting the establishment’s efforts to exact that change or forcing the establishment to allow that change. The last major counter-cultural movement took place in the mid-20th Century. Then, a number of cultural changes — including the advent of the nuclear family, the rise of mass media, and the coming of age of a sizable generation in the Baby Boomers who lacked any psychological connection with pre-WWII, pre-Depression America and its traditions — resulted in a movement that led Americans to take to the streets in order to enact major societal changes that many Americans felt the establishment of the time was resisting. The cultural revolution that resulted changed the social landscape of the nation quickly, dramatically, and irreversibly.
A year ago, the Tea Party movement seemed like a motley crew of partisans and pseudo-secessionists, a vocal yet tiny minority of McCain/Palin voters who weren’t ready to peel the bumper stickers from their cars just yet. But since then, the Democratic government’s leftward movement combined with continued economic, fiscal, and international travails have caused the Tea Parties to go mainstream. All of the sudden, freedom is cool again. Ayn Rand’s books are flying off the shelves as a new counter-culture is born. Like the last significant counter-culture that our nation experienced, Tea Partiers are organized, raucous, and have an affinity for a good public demonstration. Unlike the Boomers of the ’60s, though, Tea Partiers are marching not for social progress, but for economic (and thus personal) freedom. As mainstream disaffecteds see the right to make their own medical decisions threatened, as they begin to fear a future in which they are taxed out of existence due to the unsustainable growth of government, and as the state and the nation’s large corporate interests, such as banks, auto manufacturers, and health insurance companies that are all “too big to fail,” start to become one and the same — bailed out with taxpayers’ money, protected from a true market with real competition, and made overlords of a new feudalism and a new road to serfdom — those same mainstream Americans who once looked at the Tea Partiers with smirks on their faces are now joining the party.
But is there a presidential candidate who embodies the principles of the Tea Partiers, with their opposition to big government, high taxation, debt and spending, and collusion between the state and too-big-to-fail institutions? The conventional wisdom is that Sarah Palin will be the Tea Party candidate in the GOP primaries, running as a symbol of rebellion against Obama and Obama-ism. I suspect that Palin will receive a significant amount of Tea Party support, and perhaps even become the favored candidate of Tea Partiers. But I also think that, should he choose to run, former New Mexico Gov. Gary Johnson would give the Alaskan a run for her money amongst the disaffecteds and is a much more natural fit for the Tea Partiers inasmuch as Johnson, not Palin, is the candidate who is least like Obama in the race.
I would distinguish Gov. Palin and Gov. Johnson thusly: Sarah Palin is the Republican Obama, while Gary Johnson is the Anti-Obama. In other words, it is Palin who is the right-wing version of President Obama, while Johnson is the polar opposite of Obama in every way. Palin, like the president, was elected statewide once in one of her party’s base states. Both are in their 40s. Neither completed their first and only terms in office. Both became popular not for their positions, but for their charisma and because of their cultural cues, with Obama as the effete academic that liberals have always wanted as president, and Palin as the religious working-class hero that today’s conservatives want. Both champion a supposed new kind of politics, yet neither actually deviate from party orthodoxy on any major issues, with Obama’s presidency starting where LBJ’s left off and with Palin giving no indication that her presidency wouldn’t begin where Bush’s ended, complete with more tax cuts not paid for with spending cuts and vibrant neoconservatism. As such, Palin, while being a heroine of the anti-establishment, is viewed by many as a Trojan Horse of that very establishment that disaffecteds despise.
Gov. Johnson, meanwhile, comes out of the gate as a more mainstream version of Ron Paul, and he brings with him Paul’s mix of classical liberalism and classical conservatism. A two-term governor of a purple state, Johnson championed school vouchers and shifted Medicaid to managed care, all while advocating the de-criminalization of marijuana. Johnson is personally supportive of abortion remaining legal, but would send the decision on the issue back into the political process. On foreign policy, Johnson is opposed to continued U.S. involvement in the Middle East and believes that America should use its military only to advance U.S. interests. And Johnson, like the disaffecteds, opposes the recklessness that has led to our fiscal situation and believes that action must be taken to dramatically reduce deficits (one of Johnson’s claims to fame is his record of vetoing over one thousand spending items as governor).
If I’m reading Palin right, and it’s certainly possible that I am not, I suspect that she will run a traditional Republican campaign on tax cuts without spending cuts, on endless war in the Middle East, and on replacing Obama’s cultural bossiness with her own. In that sense, I would opine that it is Johnson, not Palin, who should be, and could be, the candidate of the disaffecteds. Obama and Palin will continue to run up the bill for future generations; Johnson would cut off the tab and pay it. Obama and Palin would regulate Americans’ lives “for their own good;” Johnson would pull back the state’s interference with individual autonomy. Obama and Palin will continue to use the military to modernize the Middle East; Johnson would use the military to defend the United States and her interests. Obama and Palin differ only regarding the values which they would promote via government; Johnson’s values are those of the classical liberal (the primacy of the individual) and of the classical conservative (realism, limits, thrift).
A perfect example of all of this can be found in the various candidates’ approach to the environment. Obama, of course, is a student of the left-wing school of thought that promotes enacting policies that benefit the environment even if the impact on humans is a negative one. Individual rights and economic growth then become less important than nature because, to leftists, nature should be revered as a deity. Sarah Palin’s response to Obama’s environmental policies, though, was striking inasmuch as while it rightly opposed the president’s plans, it still left the human will in bondage to the world around it. Palin’s “tweet” on the subject was as follows:
Copenhgen=arrogance of man2think we can change nature’s ways.MUST b good stewards of God’s earth,but arrogant&naive2say man overpwers nature
Earth saw clmate chnge4 ions;will cont 2 c chnges.R duty2responsbly devlop resorces4humankind/not pollute&destroy;but cant alter naturl chng
I don’t necessarily disagree with the policy implications of this statement but the underlying ideology seems no different than Obama’s. To both Obama and Palin, man must submit to nature. That’s because to Palin, nature is under the control of a deity and, to Obama, nature is a deity. To both, man is a slave. And how does Gary Johnson approach the seemingly insurmountable obstacles of nature? He climbed to the top of Mount Everest. With a broken leg. Obama and Palin submit to nature. Gary Johnson conquers nature.
It’s possible that Johnson, like Ron Paul, will fade into the background as a quirky candidate whose views are unacceptable to the majority of Americans. In fact, it may even be probable that this will happen. But given the nature of today’s disaffecteds, given the things that are causing them to be disaffected, and given that the nation may be looking for a president who reminds them the least of President Obama in 2012, it shouldn’t be a foregone conclusion that Palin and not Johnson will capture the hearts of Tea Partiers everywhere. Johnson’s admiration for acts of the human will combined with his hardcore fiscal conservatism and foreign policy skepticism makes him a balanced fusion of classical conservatism and classical liberalism, while Obama is the antithesis of both of those things. If the Tea Party movement becomes about changing the underlying assumptions of government rather than simply replacing a left-wing version of it with a right-wing version, anything could happen.
January 10th, 2010 at 5:40 pm
Good piece, but if the GOP panders to the Tea baggers and nominate palin for 2012, that would spell the doom of the party. Even a blind can sense that Mitt is better suited.
January 10th, 2010 at 5:42 pm
Total non-sequiter but what’s going on with Intrade today, heh heh.
January 10th, 2010 at 5:45 pm
The first tea party was during Ron Paul’s campaign. A bunch of tea partiers like Palin and came later. However, as between Ron Paul and Gary Johnson, if RP runs, the excitement will be with Ron Paul. Nothing beats a consistent 30 year record when people are feeling skeptical.
January 10th, 2010 at 5:47 pm
Interesting analysis and questions. There have comments recently that would indicate to me that Tea Partiers won’t necessarily vote as a bloc and may have quite differing opinions as to who is electable and who would govern closer to their individual preferences.
I’d love to see stats/polls showing the make-up of Tea Partiers–would that include everyone who has actually been to an event even once? Or only those who are more active in the various movements? What about those who have never been to an event, but who identify with what is going on there?
January 10th, 2010 at 5:52 pm
third partie’s won’t win. Just ask President Perot.
January 10th, 2010 at 5:53 pm
Hamaca,
I think we have to identify what Dave means when he talks about “tea partiers.”
According to the following Rasmussen poll, 54% of Republicans and 47% of independents think the average Republican in Congress is too liberal (note that the indies that Rasmussen finds are more conservative than other pollsters).
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/general_politics/january_2010/75_of_gop_voters_still_think_their_legislators_out_of_touch
I would argue that 54% of Republicans and 47% of indies represent the “tea-party” movement, though they may not attend tea party functions.
January 10th, 2010 at 6:03 pm
Tommy,
I wonder what proportion of the 54% and 47% you’re suggesting would actually see themselves as part of the Tea Party movement. I’d venture a guess that a significant number would not for various reasons, including simply not following politics as much and therefore not realizing their views may overlap.
If true, what you’re saying is interesting in that a voter does not necessarily have to self identify with the movement in order to be considered by hacks, bloggers, and analysts to be part of it.
January 10th, 2010 at 6:10 pm
#7 That is what I’m saying effectively.
I think that you are generally right: if you asked them whether they are “part” of the tea-party movement, I’d agree that half of them would say no given how vague an idea the “tea-party” movement is.
However, I’d also argue that they share the same vision and beliefs of the tea-party movement, including the types of candidates that they would support in a primary. For example, guess is that 90% of the 54% and 47% would support what happened in NY-23 and would support primary challenges across the country.
January 10th, 2010 at 6:20 pm
1 – But if the party wants ‘change’ on a Tea Party, small town values ticket then the corporate Romney will never represent it when compared to the excitement of Palin. She could end up the GOP McGovern, but for the true conservative believers, like the liberals in 1972, it would be one hell of a ride!
January 10th, 2010 at 6:33 pm
Wow! Very thought-provoking piece. I’ve never thought of Johnson and Palin in that context before.
January 10th, 2010 at 6:38 pm
3. Ron Paul over Gary Johnson??? I don’t think so. Heck the guy even appeals to me.
January 10th, 2010 at 6:39 pm
Gary Johnson
November 28, 2009
http://ouramericainitiative.com/issues/defense-and-the-middle-east-war.html
NBC/Wall Street Journal Political Survey
December 11-14, 2009
http://race42008.com/2009/12/16/poll-watch-nbcwall-street-journal-political-survey-4/
I’d also love to get Tania Reiman’s take on Gary Johnson incongruously shaking his head ‘no’ as he’s saying “I believe in a strong national defense” at the 0:20 second mark in this video clip.
January 10th, 2010 at 6:41 pm
#12 This guy is a perfect third-party candidate for us if he also jumps aboard the gay-marriage bandwagon.
We need to get some major donors around him and see if he’ll play the part.
January 10th, 2010 at 6:43 pm
Palin/VP 46%
Obama/Biden 46%
Johnson/VP: 7%
If we’re within 1.5 million votes of Obama in the popular vote, we probably win this thing.
January 10th, 2010 at 6:45 pm
8. Tommy Boy,
There is not a good definition for what the tea party really is. It seems to be a movement that doesn’t quite know what it is all about – except anger.
For instance, I’m just as ticked about the government takeover of everything as the next person, and I want gov to get the heck out of my life. Does that make me a member of the tea party? Yet, I’m not too worried about Obama’s birth certificate – as many of them seem to be. And I don’t support what happened in NY23 – at all.
I would like to see some polling on it, with solid definitions.
January 10th, 2010 at 6:52 pm
#15 I would define a “tea-party” Republican as anyone who believes the GOP is too liberal/Congressional Republicans are too liberal. That is essentially the “tea-party” mindset if you are asking what is the mindset of hte “tea-party” movement from a pure political standpoint in my opinion.
“I would like to see some polling on it, with solid definitions.”
If you accept that definition, then Rasmussen just polled it for you.
January 10th, 2010 at 6:58 pm
New 2012 Rankings http://republicanrankings.blogspot.com/2010/01/new-rankings-palins-major-srlc-speech.html
January 10th, 2010 at 7:01 pm
ever since Sarah Palin’s RNC speech the conservative movement has been fully energized.
January 10th, 2010 at 7:02 pm
Tommy Boy,
That just doesn’t seem like a very adequate definition. I doubt that is the way most tea-partiers would define themselves.
January 10th, 2010 at 7:04 pm
18. Yes, her initial speech energized McCain’s campaign. However, most of us refused to close our eyes to what we learned about Palin post convention.
January 10th, 2010 at 7:06 pm
Glad to see DaveG has come around, as he used to write stuff firmly claiming nobody would ever take small-government ideas seriously again.
January 10th, 2010 at 7:07 pm
Perry/De Mint (at least until the election then it may be Palin/Johnson).
January 10th, 2010 at 7:13 pm
I little aside from Game Change:
during debate preps, some staff members assigned to Sarah Palin by the McCain campaign discussed the “threatening possibility: that Palin was mentally unstable.” They add that several of Senator John McCain’s lieutenants agreed that if it looked as if their candidate might actually win in November, they would have to discuss how to relegate Ms. Palin “to the largely ceremonial role that premodern vice presidents inhabited”: “it was inconceivable” that “if McCain fell ill or died, the country be left in the hands of a President Palin.”
Sorry, couldn’t resist.
January 10th, 2010 at 7:24 pm
martha, “Game change” is just a book of anonymous sources and liberal talking points.
January 10th, 2010 at 7:24 pm
Counter culture? I don’t think so. It is the idiots in Washington who are out of wack. Not normal people (that’s what they are) resisting radical change that is not mainstream. So if anything, Obama and his union thugs are the counterculture.
January 10th, 2010 at 7:27 pm
martha how can you take anonymous sources as fact? who do you trust more Sarah Palin, or the anonymous ones who want to destroy her?
January 10th, 2010 at 7:38 pm
LOLOL…. kiss of death. Nominating Palin in 12. Obama for 4 more if she manages to get on the ticket.
January 10th, 2010 at 7:52 pm
I would agree with Martha on this point — I think this definition is so broad as to be meaningless. As you note above, it covers 54% of Republicans and 47% of Indies.
The problem with defining the Tea Party movement is that it is a true grass roots movement — there are no membership cards, no registration, no platform to sign on to. People join up for a variety of reasons.
An equally valid definition would be that it includes anybody who is fed up with the country’s current direction and distrustful of “The Establishment”. But I’m not sure that gets us any closer to figuring out who they will vote for.
January 10th, 2010 at 7:55 pm
Lets take a look at Palin’s record. As Mayor of that huge metro, Wassilla, she managed to leave it MILLIONS in debt for a sports complex they did not need, and she did not have the land rights too (and they are STILL in court over it). Oh, she did dole out 1200 bucks per person in AK, right before the election. that would make me popular too, until the money ran out. She circumvented standard communication practices (and secure practices) by using private e-mails to conduct state business, she used her office to intimidate a former brother in law. (The Branchflower report on troopergate DID NOT fall in her favor, as she likes everyone to believe)….Some of the Ethic’s violations were bogus, but some had much merit such as forcing her pay back money for her children’s travel. She up and quit her job when the people of AK had started to hold her accountable for that job (and the cash helped). She’s got a family that belongs on Jerry Springer, and not on the National stage. That’s most likely not ALL her fault. Sometimes kids go bad. However, statsically a mother who is home with kids when they are still in school, has a higher chance of having children that don’t do drugs, don’t smoke, don’t sleep around, go on to College, and be decent folks. (Ask Dr. Laura). Time for Career after kids are gone. But don’t parade them around and make a national joke out of a unwed pregnant teen, who will later go on to be a ‘spokesperson’ for Abstence. News flash. The time for abstence was before the baby was conceived.
Should the GOP have a stupid attack, and nominate Palin, we will lose the white house. All that work to get good solid conservatives elected in 10 and 12 will be thrown away by giving Obama 4 more to work his MoJo.
January 10th, 2010 at 7:56 pm
“martha how can you take anonymous sources as fact? who do you trust more Sarah Palin, or the anonymous ones who want to destroy her?”
At this point, I’ll trust pretty much anyone over Palin. How many demonstrably false lies does she have to tell before she’s totally discredited? For instance, that the ethics report exonerated her? That was completely, manifestly untrue.
January 10th, 2010 at 8:01 pm
Nominating Palin in 12 depends on how well she does in the debates. If she kicks ass then she will crush Obama. there is no “kiss of death” palin has ALL the talents needed to beat obama.
fundraising,fan base,crowds,charisma,media control,speeches,and first women narative. The only thing she needs is time. weather she is ready in 2012 we will know in the debates
January 10th, 2010 at 8:09 pm
“For instance, that the ethics report exonerated her? That was completely, manifestly untrue”
Well that report cleared her in legal terms. she did not violate any ethics laws, because the person who was dismissed was an at will position. she could fire him for any reason what so ever.
the 2nd report fully cleared her. http://www.usatoday.com/news/politics/election2008/2008-11-03-troopergate_N.htm
January 10th, 2010 at 8:15 pm
How does one get things so wrong, you’ve seen her budgets from 2007-on, they are on a marked decrease from Democratic and Republican predecessors alike. Are we still going on about a sports stadium, a dozen years in the past, which was financed through a bond issue, which the people had to vote for. The Branchflower report, which one of the originators was rewarded with a position in the Obama interior department. You ignore the Petumenous report which is nonpartisan. You ignore her filings against the EPA determination on the polar bear, or the pressure to actually get Exxon to drill the wells at Point Thompson. You ignore the HK speech where she outlines which are the conditions where and when US forces should be used. As I read Gary Johnson, he doesn’t seem willing
to commit to Afghanistan or Yemen, or any operation that we can see.
January 10th, 2010 at 8:18 pm
“True Tea Party Candidate”
Is that anything like a “True Conservative” or a “True Republican”?
January 10th, 2010 at 8:20 pm
What made her unstable, that she gave a damn about where this country was headed under Obama, that she knew that the lives of her son and thousands of others would be less safe, under an administration that eschews the rightness of our values, and the important of our mission, although
she didn’t think that this would become so literally true in Little Rock and Killeen. Was she right
to be concerned about someone who wanted to share the wealth, who thought that only bitter people cling to their guns and their wealth, who would give Miranda rights, and a get out of jail free
card for terrorists. Is that crazy, or was that a legitimate concern.
January 10th, 2010 at 8:22 pm
“Lets take a look at Palin’s record. As Mayor of that huge metro, Wassilla, she managed to leave it MILLIONS in debt for a sports complex they did not need, and she did not have the land rights too (and they are STILL in court over it). ” Yet another false smear from the Romney camp. The people voter for the sports complex. Mrs. Palin did not force it on the people.
January 10th, 2010 at 8:35 pm
36 Ohio Joe
If the people voted for it, O.J., what’s the court case all about…….and what good friend of Sarah’s made a bundle of money off the Sports Complex deal ?
January 10th, 2010 at 8:42 pm
Petraeus: U.S. has plan to deal with Iran’s nuclear program
http://www.cnn.com/2010/WORLD/meast/01/09/petraeus.iran/index.html?iref=allsearch
NBC/Wall Street Journal Political Survey
October 22-25, 2009
http://race42008.com/2009/10/27/poll-watch-nbcwall-street-journal-political-survey-3/#more-21167
Pew Research Survey on Iranian Nuclear Program
September 30 – October 4, 2009
http://race42008.com/2009/10/06/poll-watch-pew-research-survey-on-iranian-nuclear-program/
January 10th, 2010 at 8:45 pm
OJ. I’m not smearing her. I’m stating facts. I’ve pleanty in my quiver to toss out that would smear her. But let’s just stick to facts. I gave you several, provable and very public facts.
January 10th, 2010 at 8:46 pm
Ms. Palin also negelected to tell the electorate that the land was not clear.
January 10th, 2010 at 8:47 pm
Conservmom,
Everyone should remember that Palin also hired a city manager to do her job (in the tiny town of Wasilla? Please.), and hired a person to find as much federal pork as possible.
A sports complex was a justifiable eminent domain case? Don’t think so. There’s one set of rules for Palin, and another for everyone else.
Terrible interviews, no problem. Winks and kisses/no substance debate? No problem. Lies, no problem. Ethical lapses for pit bull reform lady? No prob.
I think Palin gets a pass on everything because she is a somewhat attractive woman with a good story. No way would conservatives ever go ga ga over a man who had her same set of issues.
DaveG is exactly right about Palin being the Republican Obama.
January 10th, 2010 at 8:51 pm
35. Narciso, what makes Palin unstable, (and unfit for national office in my opinion), are her very apparent narcissistic tendencies. Yet again, another similarity with Obama.
January 10th, 2010 at 8:59 pm
An interesting poll, it shows that there are some people who really see the longterm consequences of
the hapless policy that Obama has followed through, aided by the fabricators in the DNI which sabotaged any Bush administration initiative.
January 10th, 2010 at 9:02 pm
Really does she speak so often in the first person singular, or is it more I and we. Does she start
sentence with ‘As I always said’
January 10th, 2010 at 9:08 pm
“a vocal yet tiny minority of McCain/Palin voters who weren’t ready to peel the bumper stickers from their cars just yet.”
Oh please that isn’t even close to what the tea party started from. The tea party was catalyzed from libertarian minded constitutionalist that the GOP had drifted away from. There was no one to speak for them until the presidential campaign of Ron Paul. Then meetup groups formed spontaneously to support Dr. Paul (with no direction from any organized campaign). Tea partiers want congress to leave them the hell alone so they can live free and pursue happiness according to their own values. Congress continues to operate (no matter who’s in power) as if they know whats best and how to run your lives. Ron Paul was the only GOP presidential candidate that understands that.
Sound like you guys are to bogged down in the us vs them politics of left vs right which is a gross over simplification of the political spectrum yet we continue to model people this way. A better model is the worlds smallest political quiz found at http://www.theadvocates.org/quizp/index.html
January 10th, 2010 at 9:15 pm
DaveG, you mention Ayn Rand in a lot of your pieces. Are you a fan, by chance?
January 10th, 2010 at 9:19 pm
http://www.redinvadesblue.com/Moneybomb/Donate.html
Our one chance to stop health care,
January 10th, 2010 at 9:19 pm
So, by your lights, Dagny Taggart is a narcissist, she demands exceedingly high standards, she doesn’t suffer fools gladly if at all. She undertakes large complex programs that many say are prone to failure.
January 10th, 2010 at 9:23 pm
And Taggart will show up at the airport with scantly clad show gals from Vegas, as she did with McCain.
Sex sells. You betcha, wink wink.
January 10th, 2010 at 9:27 pm
De verdad que no vale la pena discutir con usted, senora”
January 10th, 2010 at 9:27 pm
We
LOVE
Sarah
January 10th, 2010 at 9:33 pm
OMG. They used YOUTUBE to vet Palin? I’m not getting warm fuzzies out of my own party, regarding competence.
January 10th, 2010 at 9:35 pm
North Dakota John Hoeven to announce U.S. Senate attentions tomorrow evening.
January 10th, 2010 at 9:36 pm
And narcicso, it’s not worth having an argument with you, ‘Sir’.
January 10th, 2010 at 9:36 pm
North Dakota Governor*
January 10th, 2010 at 9:37 pm
The Palin bashers here sound EXACTLY like the nutjobs over at the Daily Kos about her.
I wonder why????????????????????????
Markos, Martha, Conservmom (and the Rombot troups) parroting each other’s talking points…
AND now we know the rest of the story.
January 10th, 2010 at 9:40 pm
51. Who’s “we”? You and those three smiley faces?
(By this comment, I’m not inferring that only four people in total love Sarah–I know there are many)
January 10th, 2010 at 9:40 pm
Schmidt basically admits what I’ve said from the very first week about Palin. They did n’t realize her inadequacies until after she had been chosen.
All this Free Sarah business was nonsense. The campaign did the only thing they could do – which was to tightly control Palin to limit the potential damage.
January 10th, 2010 at 9:41 pm
53. GREAT news!
“I Hope Gov. John Hoeven Will Consider Running For U.S. Senate…
Wednesday, January 6, 2010 at 8:01pm
John Hoeven and I are good friends. I have long admired the way he has governed North Dakota. With our debt skyrocketing and the government TAKEOVER of our health care system looming, we need a strong conservative voice in the U.S. Senate.
Yesterday, Democrat Senator Byron Dorgan announced he is retiring from the Senate. I hope John will consider running for this Senate seat. We need his leadership in the Senate.”
January 10th, 2010 at 9:42 pm
http://www.facebook.com/notes/mike-huckabee/i-hope-gov-john-hoeven-will-consider-running-for-us-senate/237889028615
January 10th, 2010 at 9:45 pm
A ‘Terrifying’, ‘Mentally Limited’ V.P.
According to reporters Mark Halperin of Time and John Heilemann of New York Magazine, some McCain staffers were considering an unheard of request if McCain was elected president.
Watch CBS News Videos Online
January 10th, 2010 at 9:46 pm
57. WATCH the upcoming POLLS …
and don’t cry.
January 10th, 2010 at 9:48 pm
CBS is the TOOL of the left.
January 10th, 2010 at 9:50 pm
What I took away from this article that Sarah Palin confuses “IONS” and “EONS.” I mean, seriously, is that some inside joke I’m missing?
January 10th, 2010 at 9:50 pm
Dick Cheney thought she was a bad choice for VP.
January 10th, 2010 at 9:51 pm
61.
60 minutes is a liberal propaganda joke.
Sorry, Aaron – for my bluntness. : )
January 10th, 2010 at 9:51 pm
Regrets Over Palin?
Mark Halperin of Time and John Heilemann of New York Magazine on the regrets felt by McCain campaign staffers over the choice of Sarah Palin as nominee to be vice president.
Watch CBS News Videos Online
January 10th, 2010 at 9:57 pm
Revelations From The Campaign
Authors of a new book, “Game Change,” and John McCain’s former top campaign strategist reveal behind-the-scenes issues from the GOP and Democratic camps during the campaign. Anderson Cooper reports.
Watch CBS News Videos Online
January 10th, 2010 at 10:05 pm
You know you are not going to win the argument with those pics, What was McCain’s campaign by late September, had he chosen to point out that he along with President Bush, had been the leading figures on subprime reform, but Dodd, and Frank, and Biden and Obama, by his inaction stood in the way. How they had commandeered lobbyists like Newt to block any such plans. But he did none of that, maybe he didn’t remember, or Schmidt didn’t care to remind him. Who reminded people of the fact that
under Obama ‘electricity prices would have to skyrocket naturally’, or the philosophical kinship of Obama and Ayers. You know she rarely says I told you, but I think she’s a little entitled on occasion.
January 10th, 2010 at 10:05 pm
A lot of hate for Republicans at this Republican site. A lot of ridicule. Not as much hate for Democrats. I thought ridicule was a leftist thing.
January 10th, 2010 at 10:14 pm
Pics? If you’re referring to #61, 67-68, they’re not pictures, but videos from this evening’s episode of 60 Minutes. Click on the play button in the lower left-hand corner of the video screen (the play button will appear when you move the cursor over it.)
January 10th, 2010 at 10:15 pm
Lol so Game Change was right about Reid, the Edwards’, etc, but happen to be wrong about Palin.
January 10th, 2010 at 10:16 pm
that’s nothing, you should see GOP 12, Has 60 Minutes done any negative stories on Obama, other then possibly he’s not ‘socializing America’ fast enough. I mean its’ been a year, the stimulus was a joke, the health care bill an atrocity, the embrace of Iran, and the abandonment of it’s dissidents
a scandal.
January 10th, 2010 at 10:18 pm
funny how mccain aids blame palin even though she was the only thing that gave life to mccain.
all this trash talk of palin just makes her stronger, and underestimated. thats the last thing you want to do.
January 10th, 2010 at 10:22 pm
Oh my heavens, one lawyer searching the internet to vet Palin.
January 10th, 2010 at 10:23 pm
Palin Emerges
Steve Schmidt, chief strategist of John McCain’s presidential campaign, explains how Sarah Palin became the GOP’s candidate for vice president.
Watch CBS News Videos Online
January 10th, 2010 at 10:25 pm
56. Yes, we have a special room on the net’s that give us our talking points. You got us ‘rombots’ figured out. Actually, the truth is a bit easier to understand. We all came to our conculsions indpendently, using available resources to reseach on our own. Palin is not fit to be President of the United States. She was a shot in the dark. For crying out loud, they vetted her using one attorney after she was chosen, who never even got on a plane to go to AK and ask questions! McCain wanted a bunch is sizzle. Instead, he got fizzle.
January 10th, 2010 at 10:30 pm
And when the blow back came regarding Leiberman, they should have looked a bit closer to home for a running mate. They should have had several potentials already ‘vetted’ and waiting in the wings. They should have found a way to get Palin off the tickets, where everyone could safe face (Palin could have said she had more pressing family matters, and folks would have bought it), and jumped in with someone else. Nothing was binding Palin or McCain to having her as veep nominee, other than the false hope that things would get better. They did not, and we lost.
January 10th, 2010 at 10:34 pm
A former White House counsel, is much more than one lone lawyer. Did Schmidt give any inkling of any strategy he was going to use to counter Obama, either now or then. How does he feel about his candidate being mocked for imposing a refundable tax, and Obama going beyond and taxing everything on god’s green earth. I mean he is nominally a Republican, or does he want us all to be bailed out like his former client Schwartzenegger
January 10th, 2010 at 10:35 pm
“No, it’s God’s plan.” Oh sheesh.
January 10th, 2010 at 10:40 pm
Unfortunately, it says a lot about McCain that he truly believed his top 2 choices were Lieberman and Palin.
January 10th, 2010 at 10:47 pm
Palin fans get what they apparently want: a person who is utterly ordinary, One of Us, Authentic. I actually feel kind of sorry for Palin. She’s got extreme confidence but nothing on which to base that confidence. She was non-plussed at being named VP for the most important job in the world? How is that possible? Is she really not with it enough to know that it would entail actual qualifications?
Palin’s gotten by on looks and persona for years now. The fact that she thought it would be enough is scary indeed.
January 10th, 2010 at 10:49 pm
77. So you’r sayin’ that your 100% total agreement with the Daily Kos’ robots…
regarding SARAH PALIN
is just a mere coincidence. Really, now?
January 10th, 2010 at 10:51 pm
So True Martha. Of all the GOP he had to choose from. from outstanding compentent women who had actual experience and few skeletons beggin to come out and dance, to skilled men with management and executive experience. Heck, he even had someone of the highest caliber like Mitt Romney in his back pocket. So many to choose from. And he plays the senility card with Leiberman and/or Palin.
January 10th, 2010 at 10:52 pm
I never read the daily Kos. You seem to know more about that site than I do. We just do our own research, and think for ourselves. We don’t walk lockstep over the cliff. Guess it’s because we went to ‘elite’ schools, ya think?
January 10th, 2010 at 10:53 pm
DaveG, you mention Ayn Rand in a lot of your pieces. Are you a fan, by chance?
A friend of mine is trying to get me to read one of her books. She wants to lend me the Fountainhead, so I will probably find time to read it, even though it’s reportedly very long. I do like her basic philosophy of the individual’s own happiness being his purpose in life.
January 10th, 2010 at 10:55 pm
86 – Honestly, if you just want the essence of her thought, reading “The Virtue of Selfishness” will suffice. That’s about 170 pages. I also highly recommend “The Return of the Primitive” and “Capitalism: the Unknown Ideal.” I’ve never read The Fountainhead or Atlas Shrugged. Too long!
January 10th, 2010 at 10:57 pm
I swear to God, these people whose only rebuttal to anything is “LOL U GOT THAT FROM THE DAILY KOS” — It’s like a denial mechanism or something.
Zionist News: “Hitler wants to take over the world.”
Nazis: “Zionist News is a tool of the Jews!” — Yes, but is the information true?
January 10th, 2010 at 10:57 pm
They will probably end up like the fellow Dan Fagan, who has excoriated Sarah at a very personal level for the better part of a year, then wonders why there is no one up there that really challenges Obama’s policies. I mean let’s get serious, a rich Mormon investment banker, how many
ways do you think Axelrod will find to flay him, and the truth won’t matter, it certainly doesn’t matter here, for the most part
January 10th, 2010 at 11:00 pm
Alex, chill out.
January 10th, 2010 at 11:01 pm
Steve Schmidt: Sarah Palin has trouble with truth
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0110/31335.html
McCain aide: Palin believed candidacy ‘God’s plan’
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/01/10/AR2010011002297_pf.html
2008 Campaign, All Over Again in New Book
http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/01/09/2008-campaign-all-over-again-in-new-book/
The vicious cycle of Palin Victimization Complex
http://trueslant.com/sahilkapur/2010/01/10/the-vicious-cycle-of-palin-victimization-complex/
January 10th, 2010 at 11:02 pm
85. They will embrace you and your Palin hatred… Fact.
January 10th, 2010 at 11:05 pm
Prediction: Schmidt will not be hired next time around by ANY Presidential hopefuls. Way to go, Stevie…
January 10th, 2010 at 11:06 pm
This sort of thread is exactly why we can’t nominate Palin for President. She is far too divisive even within the Republican Party. Half the Party would jump off the Brooklyn Bridge for Sarah Palin and the other half want to push her off. We can’t have someone like that as our nominee. We would be handing Obama another term.
January 10th, 2010 at 11:06 pm
88 “is the information true?”
No.
January 10th, 2010 at 11:07 pm
Alex, They either cite the ‘daily kos’, or call us liberals. It’s as if we don’t kiss the princess ring, we need to be cast out of the party. Think about this. Schmidt went on a national program (something Palin won’t do, unless it’s tabloid like Oprah), answered questions from a far leftie in the form of Anderson Cooper. (Famous Mommy – Vanderbuilt). For me, this sounds like the GOP’s first shot across the bow that the GOP is tired of her, and is about to jetison her back to the tundra. Steve Schmidt admits she was a mistake from the git go. I disagreed with him when he felt Palin held her own against Biden. I thought she got blown out of the water by him. Winkies and blowing kissies works in beauty pagents, but not in Presidential races.
January 10th, 2010 at 11:10 pm
94. She has a right to run.
So do Mike and Mitt.
Let it play out, my friend.
ALL, three can beat Obama.
January 10th, 2010 at 11:11 pm
Nacrisco. What does Romney’s faith have to do with his success in his life? Seriously. This is all you’ve got? He’s a ‘rich mormon investment banker?’. Now I understand where you are coming from. You don’t like Mormons! Otherwise, you would not have mentioned Romney’s chosen faith.
Romney is also a very successful familyman. He’s a successful Husband and Grandfather. He worked hard in school, learned a craft he was good at. I don’t care that he made millions and billions in his lifetime. What I care about is that he is a good, honest man who works hard, has integrity and I can trust.
January 10th, 2010 at 11:11 pm
conservmom, you is what you is!
January 10th, 2010 at 11:13 pm
No Romney. Actually, palin could not beat Obama. Nor can Huckabee.
January 10th, 2010 at 11:14 pm
Yes, that is true. So now I have your permission to say that “Palin, a member of the Assembly of God faith, ….. or Huckabee, a Baptist…” So long as we put the religion behind EVERYONE, then I have no problem. But when you put the religion of only ONE – then it sounds bigoted and uninformed.
January 10th, 2010 at 11:14 pm
#97:
She has the right to run certainly, but nominating her will cause very deep divisions within the Party.
Beating an incumbent President is hard. Damn hard. In 1980 with everything that was going on, double-digit inflation, Iran Hostage Crisis, and gas lines it was still too close to call between Carter and Reagan until around November. Carter only narrowly beat Ford who had a recession, the Nixon pardon, and his slip up in the second debate to run against. Without Perot, it is possible that Bill Clinton would have lost to George H. W. Bush.
January 10th, 2010 at 11:15 pm
And you are what you are.
But you’re not being fair to our top three REPUBLICAN candidates.
Thus, Daily Kos-like. Simply true.
January 10th, 2010 at 11:15 pm
“the other half want to push her off.”
Then I suspect her GOP favorables in the next poll will be 50%?
Jon, you would probably help your argument a little bit more if you could this mystery 50% who get polled to stop telling them that they have a favorable opinion of Palin.
January 10th, 2010 at 11:16 pm
“could this” should read “could get.”
I’ll await your post saying “they like Palin but…”
January 10th, 2010 at 11:16 pm
100. Oh! Now ONLY your guy can win???
LOL
January 10th, 2010 at 11:17 pm
“She also said she believed Saddam Hussein attacked the United States on Sept. 11, 2001.”
now thats a flat out lie.
January 10th, 2010 at 11:18 pm
that is totally something a few liberals would make up about sarah.
January 10th, 2010 at 11:18 pm
Poll: 70% believe Saddam, 9-11 link
http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2003-09-06-poll-iraq_x.htm
January 10th, 2010 at 11:21 pm
#104:
As I’ve said before there are Republicans who have a favorable opinion of Sarah Palin but strongly don’t want her to run for President or be our nominee. I use the term “half” as an illustration of differences of opinion over Sarah Palin and her role within the GOP.
January 10th, 2010 at 11:24 pm
#105:
At least I’m consistent
. Besides I have a favorable opinion of Jon Voight, but I don’t want him to be President. Now if Gary Sinise were to announce…
January 10th, 2010 at 11:25 pm
Watch for the next scientific polling and these results:
1. Palin
2. Huck
3. Mitt
Stay tuned…
January 10th, 2010 at 11:25 pm
106. No not only ‘my’ guy can win. But the two others you mentioned cannot. I think there are others out there that can win as well. But Huckabee, the baptist and Palin, the AOG, cannot.
January 10th, 2010 at 11:26 pm
Polls, Truth Sometimes At Odds
Political Views, Psychology Can Make People Believe In Falsehoods
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/09/12/opinion/pollpositions/main3253552.shtml
January 10th, 2010 at 11:27 pm
113. Names, please????
(This should be good)
January 10th, 2010 at 11:29 pm
Heck, I’d even go for Newt, if he did not have so much baggage.
January 10th, 2010 at 11:30 pm
I’d be huge on Jeb Bush. But he won’t run.
I like Liz Cheney, but she has said that while her children are so young, she will not run for office.
January 10th, 2010 at 11:30 pm
Thune, Daniels, Hutchenson.
January 10th, 2010 at 11:30 pm
Huntsman.
January 10th, 2010 at 11:31 pm
Pataki, Petretrus (not sure if he’s GOP or not. Generals usually keep party affilation close to the vest).
January 10th, 2010 at 11:31 pm
I think Mike is a Southern Baptist, conservmom
AND why are you calling Sarah an AOG?
What’s that???
I think you should keep your religion out of this.
January 10th, 2010 at 11:32 pm
Gordon Smith
January 10th, 2010 at 11:32 pm
Assembly of God
January 10th, 2010 at 11:32 pm
120. GOOD!
I hope they all run.
January 10th, 2010 at 11:33 pm
Why? You said relgion is fair game, but that’s only if your LDS, right?
January 10th, 2010 at 11:34 pm
Palin didn’t know who her son would be fighting!
Omg please please please no-one take this lady seriously as a presidential candidate (even if only 10% of these stories are true).
January 10th, 2010 at 11:34 pm
I do too, and I hope Mitt wins. But should he lose to one of the others, so be it. It’s only Palin and Huckles the clown I can’t stomach.
January 10th, 2010 at 11:35 pm
Heath. 1 percent true, and were doomed.
If my son were going off to war, I would damm well know who he was fighting. But then again, I doubt Tractor saw any action. Would you put your career on the line for a gov’s son? No way. I’d keep the guy flying a desk in a nice, safe zone.
January 10th, 2010 at 11:36 pm
125. When did I ever say that? Proof?
BTW, Why do you even bring up religion so much???
AGAIN, I think you’re on the wrong website.
January 10th, 2010 at 11:36 pm
Mate (pronounced ma-tay) is gettng cold. Cheers all.
January 10th, 2010 at 11:36 pm
These were the same people who accused her of using campaign money for her own personal shopping spree. Proof! A year later it’s revealed that those aides were lying about the clothing scandal!
So what am I suppose to believe here?
January 10th, 2010 at 11:37 pm
I don’t narcicos did. You said something about it a few lines back. So, I think that if religion mentioned when it comes to Romney, it needs to go across the board to all.
January 10th, 2010 at 11:38 pm
Did Tommy Boy just really just quote a 7 year old poll?
January 10th, 2010 at 11:38 pm
Aides were lying, or Palin SAID the aides were lying? There is a difference here. And the Branchflower report did not exonerate Palin – just the opposite. So who lied? The report or Palin.
Palin.
January 10th, 2010 at 11:38 pm
Tommy Boy, a lot of people like Palin but do not believe she is leadership material.
January 10th, 2010 at 11:38 pm
132. Proof that I said it or even think it?
January 10th, 2010 at 11:41 pm
Palins husband Toddy was a member of the Alaskan Independent Party – a group who’s mission was to succeed from the United States.
Palin wanted to lie about it. But seven years of membership cannot be explained away as a ‘misunderstanding’ of what the party was about, as she tried to do.
Lie byt the McCain camp? Or a Lie by Palin?
January 10th, 2010 at 11:42 pm
#105 Here’s why the argument doesn’t work
1) You assume that the other Republicans don’t face stronger opposition to their attempts. I would argue that their favorable ratings among Republicans is strong evidence that their hill is steeper since the gap is pretty large between how Republicans feel about Palin and them (I don’t buy the argument with Pawlenty that Republicans will automatically express negative feelings about an unknown). Romney being at 52% favorables with Republicans is pretty strong evidence of opposition in my opinion if an entire half of the party won’t tell a pollster that they like him (it’s unclear with Huckabee because he shows greater variance between the pollsters).
2) The Jon Voight analogy doesn’t work because someone like Palin is surveyed in the context of a presidential contest. What comes to people’s minds when surveyed is how they view her as a presidential candidate (I think this princiiple applies to Pawlenty, Romney, and Huckabee as well). That’s how people like Billy Graham can claim an 80% favorable rating overall with adults. They don’t view him as a presidential candidate and their feelings about him are not representative of how they feel about him as a presidential candidate because there is no discussion at all about him running.
January 10th, 2010 at 11:42 pm
Yes, Palin wanted to tell everyone that Todd just checked the wrong box on his registration form. I guess that kind of thinking must work in Alaska.
January 10th, 2010 at 11:43 pm
Palin won’t run but I am sure we will have a strong conservative electoral chanting the words “anyone but Mitt Romney”.
January 10th, 2010 at 11:44 pm
But Tommy Boy, a large % of the GOP don’t even believe Palin will run. So many of the people who view her favorably do so believing she won’t run for POTUS.
January 10th, 2010 at 11:44 pm
If you don’t want a 7-year old poll, here’s a poll from 2007:
http://www.newsweek.com/id/39529
41% believe it, a greater percentage than the percentage of Americans who believe in Darwin’s theory of evolution.
January 10th, 2010 at 11:45 pm
Martha is the one with the huge chip on her shoulder and Huckabee/Palin paranoia.
She can’t stand our TWO top candidates for ’12 and her reasoning is full of slander and petty personal hatred.
It’s gonna be a long long year if she doesn’t jump on board the PALIN train!
January 10th, 2010 at 11:46 pm
Lets see he lied about the wardrobe, about the debate questions, they most likely lied about the Saddam point. She understands more than most that the Wahhabis from Arabia are the real foes, the
Saudis are almost incidental on that point. Who ran the Youtube footage of Rev. Muthee again, I’m trying to remember, Gibson tried to make it seem that God himself was blessing th e troops, when it was an only an invocation of hope, that their mission succeed.
January 10th, 2010 at 11:49 pm
#138:
I never said that the other candidates don’t have stong opposition. In fact, I would argue that we shouldn’t nominate any of the faces from 2008 since they are all so strongly divisive within the party. We need a new, fresh face like Mitch Daniels or even John Thune or Tim Pawlenty as our nominee.
January 10th, 2010 at 11:49 pm
131. Zach. Most people knew the clothing scandal was not her fault. Schmidt was right about her having some problems with the truth, and he was right to use the example of the Branchflower report, because what Palin repeatedly said about WAS provable false. It did not exonerate her, it said she violated ethics rules.
BTW – the other report that cleared Palin was issued by a board of people she had the power to fire. Knowing the way Palin works, it is reasonable to believe they may have been concerned about their jobs.
January 10th, 2010 at 11:49 pm
#145 I threw Pawlenty in there as well based on the polling because I have rjected the notion that Republicans view someone unfavorably just because they are unknown.
January 10th, 2010 at 11:50 pm
Yes, it was the party of the preceding Governor, Walter Hickel, Nixon’s Secretary of the Interior, the father of the TAP line that Biden voted against, some crazy radical he. The convention was held in her hometown, what she was going to say no
January 10th, 2010 at 11:51 pm
55% of adults believe Palin is honest and trusworthy according to an October CNN/Opinion Research Corporation poll.
January 10th, 2010 at 11:53 pm
144. Narciso, Do you have any proof that Schmidt lied? But we do have proof that Palin did lie.
It’s basically the campaign’s word against Palin’s. Why do you assume Palin is the only one possibly telling the truth.
And how do you know Palin understands anything? Where is your evidence?
January 10th, 2010 at 11:56 pm
#150 See #149
January 11th, 2010 at 12:02 am
142 – thanks for proving what most of the world knows – that Americans aren’t the brighest people!
Not counting posters on here of course
.
January 11th, 2010 at 12:02 am
Alaska Business Monthly Interview with Gov Sarah Palin
http://goliath.ecnext.com/coms2/gi_0199-6482074/Gov-Sarah-Palin-speaks-out.html
Gov. Palin and Iraq
Asked about the surge in 2007, she said she hadn’t “really focused much on the war in Iraq.”
http://www.salon.com/politics/war_room/2008/08/29/palin_iraq/index.html
January 11th, 2010 at 12:02 am
#147:
Why would we want to pick a candidate like Romney and Huckabee who have wounds from the primaries and Palin from the general election? How does nominating someone tarred with the 2008 brush push the idea that the Republicans are a change from the past?
January 11th, 2010 at 12:10 am
#154 Then why did you support McCain in 2008 when he lost in the primaries in 2000? Under this logic, anyone who has ever lost a election would be dead weight.
Under this logic, we wouldn’t have run Thune against Daschle because of his loss to Johnson in a heavily Republican year.
January 11th, 2010 at 12:12 am
Like one party is different than the other party. The only difference are the big companies who own them. Only a dullard would say otherwise.
January 11th, 2010 at 12:19 am
#155:
As the circumstances stand right now, I just think it is best for the GOP if we don’t travel down the 2008 road again. There are just too many nasty wounds from the 08 election. If circumstances change, then sure we can pick someone like Romney, Huckabee or Palin. It just doesn’t seem like the best move for 2012 to go back to 2008.
January 11th, 2010 at 12:20 am
From that very same CNN poll:
http://race42008.com/2009/10/28/poll-watch-cnnopinion-research-2012-gop-nomination-3/
Here are a couple more…
USA Today/Gallup 2012 Presidential Survey
October 31 – November 1, 2009
http://race42008.com/2009/11/05/poll-watch-usa-todaygallup-2012-presidential-survey/
Washington Post-ABC News Survey on Sarah Palin
November 16, 2009
http://race42008.com/2009/11/16/poll-watch-washington-post-abc-news-survey-on-sarah-palin/
January 11th, 2010 at 12:24 am
#158 Was this data in the poll as well?
January 11th, 2010 at 12:25 am
Obama was 48/51 on the first question in that poll as well.
January 11th, 2010 at 12:28 am
Aron,
Seems a little dated since we have new polling data from CNN…
http://race42008.com/2009/12/07/poll-watch-cnnopinion-research-political-favorability-survey/
January 11th, 2010 at 12:29 am
Pretty good blog string everyone (mu humble option). Two quick things,
1. Romney supporter are bombarded with “he’s a mormon so…you know he’s evil, etc, etc” all the time. Gets old, I think thats the place were conservmom was coming from.
2. Alot of “We need a fresh new face, new blood, etc” so OK, this in for the Leader of the Free World, POTUS, CinC; NOT the contestant for next season of American Idol.
But good to read from all of you….even No RomneyCare,,:)
January 11th, 2010 at 12:41 am
153 is amazing!
Rommey (rightfully) was criticized for supporting timetables but really what Sarah said was much worse.
Oh dear. It’s going to be a fun 2 years if she runs!!
January 11th, 2010 at 12:41 am
Tories pledge a 75% cut in immigration
http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/2802566/Tories-pledge-a-75-percent-cut-in-immigration.html
January 11th, 2010 at 12:45 am
For the record, I do hope that Palin runs in the primaries. That way, the voters can finally decide whether or not all these issues really matter. For all the scorn heaped upon primaries, they do serve as a vetting process and every issue a candidate has is aired to the public.
January 11th, 2010 at 12:56 am
162)Actually there has been very little of the kind, except that really stupid thread on Saturday Night, with the Blumenthal video, which was such a low blow. There were some frictions in the past 120-150 years, but nothing to bring up now. Like I say, Romney I’m fairly indifferent about, Now if one were to judge him by his supporters that would be most unfair.
January 11th, 2010 at 12:57 am
158. thats an old poll. Palin numbers have had a good boost since her book tour.
134. Palin was cleared from troopergate: http://blogs.usatoday.com/onpolitics/2008/10/palin.html.
so you can’t call her a liar. plus the first report was just a bogus opinion, and said that she could legally fire him. the report was contradicted if you read the full report. It says no laws were broken but we believe she abused her power.”
January 11th, 2010 at 1:03 am
“report exonerates Gov. Sarah Palin in the Troopergate controversy.”
The state Personnel Board-sanctioned investigation is the second into whether Palin violated state ethics law in firing her public safety commissioner, and it contradicts the earlier findings by a special counsel hired by the state Legislature.
Both investigations found that Palin was within her rights to fire Public Safety Commissioner Walt Monegan.
But the new report says the Legislature’s investigator was wrong to conclude that Palin abused her power by allowing aides and her husband, Todd, to pressure Monegan and others to dismiss her ex-brother-in-law, Trooper Mike Wooten. Palin was accused of firing Monegan after Wooten stayed on the job.
The Palins have argued that Wooten was a loose cannon who had tasered his stepson, drank beer in his patrol car, and threatened Palin’s father, and that their complaints that he shouldn’t be on the force were justified.
The Troopergate matter became sharply politicized after Palin was announced as Republican presidential candidate John McCain’s running mate in Tuesday’s election.
The report, released at a Monday afternoon press conference at the Hotel Captain Cook, presents the findings and recommendations of Anchorage lawyer Timothy Petumenos, hired as independent counsel for the Personnel Board to examine several complaints against Palin.
Petumenos wrote the Legislature’s special counsel, former state prosecutor Steve Branchflower, used the wrong state law as the basis for his conclusions and also misconstrued the evidence.
His findings and recommendations include:
- There is no cause to believe Palin violated the state ethics law in deciding to dismiss Monegan as public safety commissioner.
- There is no cause to believe Palin violated the state ethics law in connection with Wooten.
- There is no cause to believe any other state official violated the ethics act.
- There’s no basis to conduct a hearing to “address reputational harm,” as requested by Monegan.
- The state needs to address the issue of using private e-mails for government work and to examine how records are kept in the governor’s office. Palin used her Yahoo e-mail account for state business until it was hacked.
http://www.adn.com/palin/story/577323.html
January 11th, 2010 at 1:06 am
BOTH investigations found that Palin was within her rights to fire Public Safety Commissioner Walt Monegan.
January 11th, 2010 at 1:06 am
I agree with consermom and martha anyone but huckabee and palin. Palin is completely unqualified and has no discernable skill nor has true fiscal conservative credentials and relies on winks and smiles. Huckabee is a pro life big gov dem
January 11th, 2010 at 1:24 am
Palin was in over her head..she knew darn well she was not ready to do what was going to be asked of her, so why did she agree to sign on as the VP running mate? It’s just one big mystery now, but it’s beginning to unfold….for sure we haven’t heard the end of it, there’s too many people involved.
Palin can’t keep saying that everyone is out to get her, and her fans can’t keep protecting her from criticism….they’re beginning to sound ridiculous.
January 11th, 2010 at 1:35 am
Not only did she sign on lkv but she is apparently considering running for one better in 2012!
We dodged a bullet with John Edwards. That should serve as a warning about dumb young pretty narsaccistic upstarts who became celebrities after losing VP runs.
January 11th, 2010 at 1:45 am
#143 RomneyCare:
Martha’s been here for a long time, does her homework, and brings up some good issues for debate… Because she dares to criticize Palin and Huck with the truth, why do you say she has a chip on her shoulder? Come on now…..
January 11th, 2010 at 1:56 am
#171, 172
See #104 and #138.
You guys may just want to stick to the “nearly every single Republican who is survyed in a scientific poll likes her but doesn’t think she’s ready for the president narrative.”
And then explain the 52% GOP favorable number for Romney among Republicans surveyed in a scientific poll.
January 11th, 2010 at 2:30 am
“Palin is completely unqualified ”
Umm WRONG
she is more qualified then Obama by about 3 years.
she has 16 years of public office from mayor to Gov.
was a oil and gas regulator for 1 year and exposed corruption.
January 11th, 2010 at 2:46 am
Neither Palin nor any other prospective GOP candidate for that matter (with perhaps the unlikely exceptions of Dick Cheney and David Petraeus) will be able to credibly make the argument in 2012 that he or she is more qualified than the man completing his fourth year as the nation’s Commander in Chief.
January 11th, 2010 at 2:49 am
173. Martha is everything that’s wrong with some posters:
C L O S E D
M I N D N E S S
January 11th, 2010 at 2:51 am
close-mindedness – definition
Intolerant of the beliefs and opinions of others; stubbornly unreceptive to new ideas …
January 11th, 2010 at 2:53 am
“Palin is completely unqualified ”
-Quotes like these from Martha and her kind is EXHIBIT A.
January 11th, 2010 at 2:55 am
Heath:
If Palin runs in 2012, she needs to learn discipline and learn how to stay on message or she will have nothing but trouble…..I would be surprised if she runs for Pres., she’s already ticked off most of the people she needs to get a campaign going…..She’s milking this thing for all it’s worth..she’s on the gravy train, and will say anything to get in the news….her main concern now is selling books and getting big bucks for speaking gigs.
January 11th, 2010 at 2:58 am
(follow up to 179.)
I’m not sure that one is really supportive of the Republican Party when I read such hyperbole here.
January 11th, 2010 at 3:01 am
180, My friend,
Whether she runs or not, this is not how you treat one of our own.
January 11th, 2010 at 3:02 am
…if you want to win, that is.
January 11th, 2010 at 3:04 am
179:
Knowing the skills a President must have, what makes Palin qualified to be President?
January 11th, 2010 at 3:09 am
BUT if it’s your way (your guy only) or the highway…
Prepare to lose or to be severely disappointed by the voters. (see IOWA)
January 11th, 2010 at 3:15 am
184. The same exact skills that many of our past Presidents have had in our history as a Nation.
Some more in some areas, others in other areas.
AND she’s a leader. (Btw, she’s leading your guy)
January 11th, 2010 at 3:15 am
Romney: 182
Hey, I voted for McCain/Palin, but since the election, she has done nothing even to indicate she is a Republican….If Palin is toying with the idea of running on a third party ticket which would guaranty a second Obama term, couldn’t herself be called a good Republican.
January 11th, 2010 at 3:20 am
YOu mean Republican voters? I think you would want Republican and Republican-leaning to have a high favorable rating of you to get your campaign going.
See comments 104 and 138.
January 11th, 2010 at 3:21 am
187. Listen up…
She IS a Republican.
Martha & the Bots are just stirring up trouble here. \\
They ARE nutty.
January 11th, 2010 at 3:35 am
#189
I’m not just criticizing Palin for the heck of it. This is fair criticism of her, she had problems with the McCain Campaign staff, and had problems with the people in Alaska, she has problems with the press, she has problems everywhere she goes. Other Politicians let the criticisms run off their back because there’s always something written or said that is unfair about them, but she picks fights with these people….She needs to grow thick skin if she’s gonna stay in politics.
January 11th, 2010 at 3:55 am
188 Tommy:
She talks about the Republican machine and the Republican establishment and the elitists without naming names..I mean, who are these people but the GOP… That is the Republican Party, and a necessary part of any political party, that moves the agenda forward…. And the Republican party is still conservative by nature. You could say the Tea Party has become a Political machine and on it’s way to becoming the TeaParty establishment…And now Palin is picking a fight with CPAC and it’s organizers. These are the people whose support she is gonna need to start a campaign.
January 11th, 2010 at 7:18 am
Too many posts by “No Obamacare! No Romneycare!” in this thread! And he links to the anti-Semite Buchanan.
January 11th, 2010 at 7:54 am
I for one would rather have the Tea Party establishment pick our candidate, all things being equal than the GOP establishment. Yes, that is a good chance that the Tea Party establishment will choose Mr. Johson over Mrs.Palin, but nevertheless, I’d rather have a new set of character running the establishment than the current set of clowns running the show.
January 11th, 2010 at 8:30 am
She has put a bullseye on Schmidt, who admitted the campaign had lost its nerve in September, after
the AIG collapse, and the ‘boundless ideaiism’ of the Obama campaign, please gag me. Wallace is yet another. The likes of Murphy, who seemed willing to cede the GOP, into the New Ice Age, Ruedrich and Murkowski back home. The Press, the people who have Obama prepped up on a Sedan chair, for the last year, are you saying there is no bias. The people who proffer the ridiculous Youtube, like the secessionist claims one, created by an Axelrod client, who tried to get NEA business for an Obamacare
spot, The same people who were keeping Huckabee as a viable candidate, despite his many faultsNow who’s being naive
January 11th, 2010 at 9:06 am
Um, AK Report. untrue. Taht’s the Palin version. Palin was found to have abused her office. You know that, I know that, and Palin knows that. HOWEVER, the truth is something she just can’t wrap her head around. If she says it, it is so. Right? Wrong. Heck, I did more vetting on her than the McCain camp.
January 11th, 2010 at 9:13 am
No Romney care. Hum. Funny you’d talk about ‘closed mind’. Your name sez it all.
January 11th, 2010 at 9:15 am
186. Imagine if you will, Romney saying calmly that being picked for president or Vice President by McCain was ‘Gods Will’.
January 11th, 2010 at 9:54 am
[...] See the example post: race42008.com » Blog Archive » Who is the True Tea Party Candidate? [...]
January 11th, 2010 at 1:47 pm
Sarah Palin Signs Multi-Year Deal With Fox News Channel
I think everyone saw this coming a mile away…
Former Alaska Governor Sarah Palin has signed on as a contributor to the Fox News Channel.
Fox News Channel today confirmed that Palin will appear on various network programming on a regular basis as part of a multi-year deal. No financial terms were disclosed.
Though no specifics were given according to FNC sources Palin will not get her own show, but will host occasional series that run on the network and appear on other FNC programming.
http://tvbythenumbers.com/2010/01/11/sarah-palin-signs-multi-year-deal-with-fox-news-channel/38387
Finally! Somethin’ that ConservMom can watch and enjoy with her family…;)
January 11th, 2010 at 1:48 pm
Go Sarah!
January 11th, 2010 at 2:01 pm
Get a life, Alex!
That is shameful… what you wrote in 192.
So… what are are you… a freshman or sophomore in COLLEGE???? Which is it????
Don’t worry…When you grow up you’ll understand politics, my friend!
1st) Sarah Palin
2nd) Mike Huckabee
3rd) Mitt Romney
~47th) Your guy, Rudy Giuliani
…is how we currently stand… SAD but TRUE
BUT it could all change tomorrow…but I kinda doubt it.
See ya when the next polls come out, Junior.
Oh, I can’t wait till then!!!!!!!
January 12th, 2010 at 8:31 am
[...] Man triathlete.Why? Johnson is a “natural fit” for the movement, says DaveG at Race42012.com. as a fiscal conservative who is attractive to liberals, he’s [...]
January 12th, 2010 at 9:51 am
Bottom line. Palin raised taxes in the couple of years as governor of conservative Alaska. Johnson never raised taxes (or fees or anything) in the 8 years as governor of a Democrat dominated state.