Cons4Palin don’t like me
Conservatives4Palin, a reasonably big website by and for conservatives who support Governor Sarah Palin (for president in 2012), doesn’t like me very much. They took my post of yesterday a bit too serious, thinking I had joined their side. As it is, however, that’s certainly not the case. I’m not a Palin “trasher,” but I’m also not overwhelmed by her performance last year. She has talent, sure, but she displayed a serious lack of knowledge, especially about foreign affairs.
Team McCain mishandled Palin. That’s clear. If she would’ve been allowed to be herself, and to determine the steps she took, she would’ve impressed me more, of that I’m sure. But this isn’t a politician with only strengths. She has weaknesses, and they are rather obvious.
First and foremost: Palin has been successfully portrayed as a religious fanatic. Whether this is a correct image (it’s not) or not is irrelevant. What matters is what voters think. Her approval ratings were less than stellar last year, except for with the conservative base, who loved her. Having the support of this base is a necessity for a Republican candidate for president, but it’s also vital to have broader appeal. As of yet, Palin doesn’t have that.
Second, Palin may be a good governor, but she has no business experience. I’m one of those who believe that America’s president should have at least some experience in this field, especially considering the times – massive budget deficits and debts will be a drain on the American economy for years even decades to come. Mitt Romney, yes his name pops up again, is one of the most successful entrepreneurs in America today. Palin’s not.
Third, and this is of major concern to me, it struck me last year that Palin didn’t have a lot of original thoughts on foreign policy. Now, a president doesn’t have to be a grand intellectual, foreign policy experts (he or she has advisers for that). But (s)he must have thought about this subject for longer than a few hours, and have developed a personal, realist view. Advisers are important, but a president has to have his / her own general take on complex issues.
Now, all of this doesn’t mean that I believe Palin is not presidential material. It’s 2009, not 2012, let alone 2016 (she’s young, if she doesn’t make it in 2012, she can try again in 2016, and even in 2020). She has years left to learn. She can bide her time, surround herself with advisers, experts, etc., travel abroad regularly, set up a massive national PR machine, and so on, and so on. If she does, and if she truly dedicates herself to learning about the world and its peoples, she could be a force to be reckoned with. At such a moment, I too will throw my weight behind her and pull for her.
As of yet, however, she lacks basic knowledge, and I believe 2012 comes too early for her. Then again, I’ve been surprised by how fast people learn in the past, and how quickly they can grow, so perhaps she’ll surprise me as well.
I agree with you, Michael. I wish that her fans would realize that her best chance at redeeming her public image would be to lay low for a while, concentrate on being an effective governor, while making occasional forays into national politics (just to keep her name in the mix, and to hopefully begin showing more knowledge of national and international affairs.)
I think she has a lot of promise but her image may have been permanently damaged by ‘coming out’ too soon. There’s zero chance of convincing those who dislike her right now that their impression was wrong- she’ll have to wait for a different political climate, and come back to the scene armed with ample knowledge, experience, and media savvy, if she has any chance at all. Her supporters are only preaching to the choir right now, and that actually hurts rather than helps her.
@Christine: as happens more often, you and I are in complete agreement. She should lay low for a while. Build a machine, but quietly so, surround herself by great minds, study, learn, and focus on being a good conservative governor.
Her husband owns a racing team that pulls in corporate endorsements and he’s been racing for years. He also has a commerical fishing venture of which she was a part. She’s been involved with both of those ventures.
She also runs a household of seven people which, I can say with great confidence, is very much like running a small business when it comes to budgeting, supplies, and logistics.
As for the foreign policy knowledge, well, I don’t know whether she has the takes on these critical issues or not. We didn’t much get a chance to see during the campaign. We do know that she is capable of negotiating with a foreign government successfully, though, thanks to the works she’s had to do with Canada as Governor. We also know that she had a better handle on what the Bush Doctrine was than Charlie Gibson.
As for the foreign policy knowledge, well, I don’t know whether she has the takes on these critical issues or not. We didn’t much get a chance to see during the campaign. We do know that she is capable of negotiating with a foreign government successfully, though, thanks to the works she’s had to do with Canada as Governor. We also know that she had a better handle on what the Bush Doctrine was than Charlie Gibson.
Sure, Jimmie, but we also know that she was sufficiently unprepared for the media scrutiny that she couldn’t express her foreign policy chops without giving a line to Tina Fey, “I can see Russia from my house.”
It was surely unfair that the media and entertainment industry took that line out of context, when what she was simply pointing out is that Alaska’s proximity to Russia makes her governorship relevant in terms of international relations with that country (and Canada, of course.) But the point is that she came to the national scene in a very naive fashion and was unable to avoid stepping into these verbal landmines. There’s no use whining about bias, just prepare for it and call people out when they use questions designed as ‘gotchas’. A conservative of Palin’s ilk (female, conservative, family values oriented) is a lightning rod and she has to figure out how to divert the strikes and control the topics of conversation to her advantage.
C Stanley, she actually gave a pretty detailed answer which happened to include the offhand statement “you can actually see Russia from land here in Alaska”. ABC then edited out everything else but that. I’m not sure what she could have done to avoid such a “verbal landmine”.
Fair enough, Bob (though I don’t recall what was edited out- I think I’ve seen some of that and I don’t remember being that impressed by the rest of it- it was better than the edited version but certainly didn’t blow me away.)
But as far as avoiding pitfalls, I think she has to choose her words VERY carefully to not even include a sentence that sounds so overly simplistic when taken out of context. She could have simply explained it as I did- that the proximity to Russia and Canada make the governorship of Alaska slightly more in tune with affairs that involve other countries than other governor’s positions are.
Palin is charismatically appealing. She has the hockey mom / down to earth approach that resonates with some voters. This is her strongest suit.
What she lacks is substance. Limited experience in the economy, business, and foreign affairs. We are learning (very painfully) what its like to give on the job trainign to a new president.
As time passes, it will become more and more apparent that what this country needs is Mitt Romney. An experienced leader in crisis situations, if only he wasn’t mormon. right?
The left “Journolisted” her. They were ready and waiting. The press was the willing accomplices.
The minute the announcement was made the entire Internet filled up with the same 3 or 4 stories only to be expanded the next day or two. They made the entire election about Sarah Palin. Was there no concerted effort by the left to destroy her?
Of course there was and it continues to this day because honestly the left is much more afraid of Palin then they are any other possible candidate out there right now because they know WHAT a charismatic leader who is freakin clueless can accomplish.
He/she can become president.
Michael, you know if Romney had won the nomination, he would have been parodied as a pitiless corporate
raider, with the weird underwear, theological arguments about Satan and Jesus, basically all the carp that Huckabee brought out, all garbage but so is the ‘exorcism’ and the “we fight in the name of the lord” in the name of the lord.
Look you seem to have ignored every aspect of her policies, on oil, electricity, taxes, the stimulus, environment, in your blanket dismissal of C4P. Yes we have learned that endorsing a candidate you really know nothing about, as the media did, is a risk. As to the other commenters, you accepted the hack edit
as a real representation, misunderstand the nature of oil politics, and missile defense, issues that neither Couric or Gibson understand. Fey is something
entirely different, because besides a superficial resemblance, her performance captured none of her
characteristics, perhaps that was the point.
“Look you seem to have ignored every aspect of her policies, on oil, electricity, taxes, the stimulus, environment, in your blanket dismissal of C4P. Yes we have learned that endorsing a candidate you really know nothing about, as the media did, is a risk. As to the other commenters, you accepted the hack edit
as a real representation, misunderstand the nature of oil politics, and missile defense, issues that neither Couric or Gibson understand. Fey is something
entirely different, because besides a superficial resemblance, her performance captured none of her
characteristics, perhaps that was the point.”
Narcisco. A politician can never claim to be the victim of anything. If her or his image is so thoroughly distorted he / she can’t win, it’s because (s)he proved unable to do something about it. A politician should be able to fight back, however, against such issues.
And trust me, I’m not basing my opinion on ‘media hackery.” In fact, I’ve criticized the media for the way they portrayed her. I don’t buy into their picture at all. I buy into my own observations. That’s something else altogether.
Michael,you are so wrong.
I don’t blame you, because you are ill informed about the accomplishment of Gov.Palin, as many other people are.
The MSM has done its work very well in spreading all kind of rubbish and lies and disinformation about Gov.Palin and hiding her accomplishments.(and they are still continuing their attacks on Gov.Palin and her family)
If you are really interested in the accomplishments of Gov.Palin , read this article.
http://www.conservatives4palin.com/2009/04/response-to-poligazette.html
You will be surprised.
Gov.Palin is one of those rare politicians ; authentic ,very smart,integer and with a great servant’s heart.
I went and read your article, Jan. Unfortunately, rather than make a case FOR Palin’s qualifications, you spent most of your time in that article just repeating standard talking points AGAINST other Republican and Democratic candidates.
You’re going to have to do better than that to persuade anyone not already persuaded.
@Jason Arvak
Did you read the article?
I doubt it.
The article gives a comparison between the qualifications of Palin and Romey.
And is no “just repeating standard talking points AGAINST other Republican and Democratic candidates”.
Apparently I read it more than you. Because in addition to the unsupported assertions about Palin’s business experience in the fishing industry (I thought that was her husband, not her) and the laughable claims that the ONLY way that business experience could be AT ALL relavant was if Forbes had been elected (irrelevant to Palin’s qualification), you also went off at length bashing Biden (completely irrelevant to Michael’s point or Palin’s qualifications, but a repetition of standard talking points anyway) and others. Then you come on here and seem unaware of the full content of your own article.
This is the problem I have with sites like yours. They seem to exist not to discuss or debate the messy, gray realities of modern politics and modern political candidates, but rather to just try to push a purist agenda for one candidate and/or against a candidate or group of candidates. The result is presentations that are always less than fully honest with the facts. Your devotion to Sarah Palin blinds you to her negatives at the same time it leads you to exaggerate everyone else’s. As a result, your articles just aren’t persuasive to anyone who is not already a member of the pseudo-religious cult of personality movement you champion.
The fact that the best you can do in response to my criticism is try to call me a liar says it all. You have today hurt your candidate far more than you have helped her.
Tell me Michael, what particular policy plank do you disagree with, her support of Georgia, in the recent
Russian incursion, including NATO membership if need
be, support of US actions in Afghanistan and Iraq, the
need for energy development, in part to counteract the influences of Wahhabi, Iranian & Venezuelan influences. Her viewpoint on ‘unlawful enemy combatants’
One must make the comparison with Romney, since he did say that Gitmo should be doubled, did you agree
with the advisors like Cofer Black, former CIA counter terror chief and Blackwater VP. The Russian crisis happened long after the primaries, so I don’t recall his response in the matter. I do recall he was kind of equivocal on the Petraeus counterinsurgency
strategy, what judgement was shown there.
@Jason Arvak.
I still doubt you read the article.
You have not come with a one reasonable refutation of the facts in the article; only some unreasonable bashing.
That’s twice you accused me of not reading the article after I said I did. Normally, we ban people for calling other people liars like that. I suggest you change tactics.
@Jason Arvak.
Again , you give not one reasonable refutation of the facts in the article ; only unreasonable bashing.
If that is all you can do ,then a discussion is useless.
I agree that a discussion is useless, since there are no “facts” in your article, only unwarranted assertions and a LOT of irrelevant material. When you preach only to the already-converted and remain unwilling to respond to criticism except by attacking the personal integrity of the critic, you doom yourself to failure. From my perspective, your project seems the same as the Paulbots’, just with a much more attractive icon in the “infallible saint” position.
The funny thing is that I used to be one of Palin’s biggest boosters around here. But after some of her disasters on the campaign trail, my enthusiasm waned and the behavior of some of her most zealous supporters doesn’t help.
I can’t speak for Michael, but I can state the reasons for my disagreement with Palin on some of these points:
1) NATO membership for Georgia would put NATO in a position where Georgia could drag it into a situation where it must choose either an unwinnable war with Russia or the effective abolition of the alliance. Palin’s approach may be well-motivated in that I agree with the general sentiment of supporting Georgia and opposing Russian resurgence, but the specifics of her approach are extremely poor strategy and reflect ignorance of the military realities of the situation.
2) Energy development is a good idea, but will do nothing to counter the influence of foreign powers in the energy sector for many years. It is not the panacea Palin presents it as.
3) Palin’s approach to unlawful combatants relies on the assumption that unlawful combatants have no status or rights under international law and can therefore be treated however we want to. That assumption is ignorant on the law and foolishly simplistic as a practical matter.
@Jason Arvak
By the way, you wrote ” in your article” and ” This is the problem I have with sites like yours”; but I only put a link to the article and I never claimed that it is my site.
I never stated that I wrote the article or that it is my site.
So, next time , before you become angry and begin to bash your political opponents , read who is writing the article!
Than perhaps you sound a little bit more tolerable.
I have become angry because of your obnoxious and abusive behavior HERE, Jan. The only reason you haven’t been banned is because Michael interceded on your behalf.
And for you to complain about bashing political opponents while defending and promoting an article that does it extensively is hypocrisy. It is also pretty snotty for you to show up as a commenter and presume to pass judgment on what is and is not “tolerable”.
@Jason Arvak
So, you are angry because I put a link to that article ; and you were thinking I wrote the article. (and apparently you have something against Palin)
But fortunate Micheal is more tolerable and reasonable.
Micheal wrote”Oh, and if you ever want to write a post for my site, explaining your take on Palin – what her strengths are, what she did and didn’t do, why the media were so wrong about her (I think they were to a significant degree by the way) – let me know. I’d be happy to run it. As could be proved by Joshua’s post: i’m not a dictator – welcome dissent and civilized debate.”
Anyway ; I am waiting on the respond to that article from Micheal ( on C4); he promised that.
Certainly it will be (has to be!)a much better response than your bashing of that article.
I have specified several substantive disagreements with Palin above, Jan.
Instead of responding to those OR the criticisms of the article you promoted, you continue to attack me personally as not “tolerable” for even having had a disagreement with Palin in the first place. (The fact that you are not able to tell the difference between disagreeing with Palin and having “something against Palin” is highly revealing.)
That’s lame. And if you keep it up, you’re going to get banned. This is your final warning.
Jan: I’m stepping in here. Do that again, and you’re banned. Play by our rules. If not, go.
@Jason Arvak
Jason , first you claim I wrote the article ,than you claim it is my website and then you attack me personally.
” Your devotion to Sarah Palin blinds you to her negatives at the same time it leads you to exaggerate everyone else’s. As a result, your articles just aren’t persuasive to anyone who is not already a member of the pseudo-religious cult of personality movement you champion.”
I think you are very unreasonable.
Now if you read the article ,I gave you the link , you can learn something about the accomplishments of Gov.Palin in comparison to Romey.
And bashing ,because you disagree with the article , is not necessary.
Of course you do. I disagree with Palin on a number of issues, several of which I specified (to no response from you).
You, on the other hand, are a participant and promoter of a site dedicated to showing that Palin is perfect and infallible.
There is seriously no likelihood that you would ever see me as anything other than completely unreasonable, for I have committed the Great Heresy of doubting Governor Sarah Palin!
But that doesn’t make your judgment dispositive.
And talking about disagreements isn’t “bashing” except to the over-zealous purist.
P.S. Since you continue after repeated warnings to attack me personally rather than discuss the substantive criticisms I outlined above, you have been banned from commenting further, Jan. Those others who may be willing to discuss disagreements about Palin substantively and with civility are very welcome to do so.
P.P.S. I think it is spelled “Romney”, not “Romey”. I’d normally not comment on such trivial things, but since you consider detailed attention to the facts to be so supremely important, I though I should here.
Jason, I disagree with practically every point, and more interestingly so does Michael and I assume your candidate, I just hope that you actually state the disagreement, instead of deny that there is a policy.
Sadly we will find the folly of such an understanding
of the third point, long before 2012. I don’t see the harm of increased energy and electrical development, which runs counter to this administration’s goals
I also disagree with your characterization of her business experience, but that’s not that surprising. We shall see whose views prevail, if she decides to run in 2012, Good day
Michael and I disagree on many things. This site is not an ideological echo chamber.
Also, I doubt you know who “my candidate” even is. I doubt it because I don’t know who my candidate is for 2012. I admit to being underwhelmed by the current slate of hopefuls for the Republicans, but I might see someone emerge (Gingrich? Pawlenty?) who might yet get me very interested.
I doubt Palin will be that candidate, unless she somehow becomes more interested in the world and less prone to what I see as trivial and mal-informed talking points, especially on foreign policy.
BTW, with regard to energy alternatives, I do support the continued development of alternative energy and the exploitation of existing resources through offshore drilling and drilling in ANWR. I just don’t buy Palin’s attempts to make that into some kind of major foreign policy point.
Ah Jason, I thought we would agree to disagree, but then you had to be disagreeable. So you agree with the last plank, there’s also movement onhydroelectric,
but let’s be blunt we don’t power our cars, with hydroelectric, nor do we make the bulk of most materials with that supply. One focuses on that area, but that’s her specialty and a PFUD approach or some kind of trust, might encourage more development.
Question though, if Russia moves toward Tblisi, again
and/or Kiev and Baku, what should the policy be. It’s not an idle threat, that’s what Czarist Russia did in the 18th and early 19th Century, and Soviet Russia
in the early part of the more region focused Harding
Administration. What aspect of one assumes European policy, or is it policy is the nearby Far East,should she brush up. The point may be moot next week anyways after the N. Korean launch which could technically hit Alaska or Hawaii.
I don’t mean to be disagreeable how about setting forth a set of principles which candidates would rally around, if names are a sticking point. Most candidates on the GOP side, were equivocal last time around on the counterinsurgency strategy employed by General Petraeus, is that a viable plan for the North West Frontier. How far afield should U.S, and Coalition forces venture, into urban environs like
Quetta and Peshawar. Another point should full Geneva convention rights apply to insurgents or even unlawful enemy combatants, how would that work without forcing US troops into courts. Health care is an area that one can count as area that most Republicans, Palin included, never really addressed.
I don’t know what the optimum view on immigration is,
I guess I lean more toward some integration of illegals, and further legal immigration, I live in
South Florida. What are the limits and advantages of
a broad sanction policy (ie: Cuba, Iraq. Sudan, Yugoslavia)
My message to elites libs, pundits, msm and flip-flop republicans:
We have elected a weakling president who is wiling to sell americans to the world just to maintain winning a popularity contest. We have elected a leader whose best quality is just to speak with sweet words and an intelligent talker but a weakling doer. A Harvard graduate?? Are all graduate from Harvard effective leaders?? I do not think so. Did Americans regain respect from the world because we have elected a first black liberal president from harvard? I do not think so. What happened for the past two weeks?? Somali pirates hostaged american crew..North Koreans were not stopped with their long rang missile plans? What did our lib president do?? just doing nothing but sweet talks and continue writing letter to his Russian and Iranian boyfriends. He is a real man, yes, but with no balls between his legs. No wonder… he did not even serve in the army like Michael Moore who had proposed once to abolish the entire military in order to have peace with terrorists. Now, with his leadership, America is on the way to legalize same sex marriages and abortion. Do americans have no fear of God anymore? Anyway, I say this: elites libs and msm can continue to hate and smear down the good governor Palin. You have still 4 years to enjoy these stuffs. God is just watching all of us.. IN HIS TIME, goodness will still prevail over evilness.