What's the worry John?
Other than being a great American, and a true leader for the conservative movement, Sarah Palin is having another effect that was not anticipated. Her very presence is making the RINOs (Republican in Name Only) stand out like a sore thumb. Not only is she a threat to the Democrat party, she is a threat to the Republicans who have abandoned their conservative roots. John McCain is a prime example!
McCain and his supporters need to load up on Ambien and Xanax during the next several weeks, as sleepless nights are inevitably ahead in anticipation of the release of Palin’s book on Nov. 17th.
Reported by the Washington Post:
When Steve Schmidt, campaign manager for Sen. John McCain’s (Ariz.) presidential bid, said late last week that former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin as the Republican presidential nominee in 2012 would be “catastrophic” for the party, he set off another in a series of skirmishes between the pro and anti-Palin camps within the GOP.
On the anti-Palin side came a tweet from Mike Murphy, a Republican media consultant and a past adviser to McCain. “Steve Schmidt correct about Sarah Palin and ‘12,” wrote Murphy. “Shame he didn’t feel same way a year ago when he was lobbying McCain to choose her as VP.”
And on Monday, John Weaver, McCain’s closest political adviser for much of the past decade, said that he was nearly certain that the former governor would never be the Republican nominee and added that, if she was, “it would surely mean a political apocalypse is upon us.”
Schmidt’s comments also brought out the pro-Palin forces.
John Coale, a Democrat and personal friend to the governor, insisted that Schmidt “couldn’t stand Sarah from day one” and alleged that Schmidt and “his people” had “screwed up the ABC and CBS interviews.”
Charlie Black, a close adviser to McCain during the 2008 campaign and a lobbyist based in Washington, was less confrontational about Schmidt’s comments but did note that the criticism of the former governor “reminds me of the things some Republicans said about [Ronald] Reagan in 1977.”
This latest incident highlights the chasm that has formed within the Republican party over who Palin is, what she means to the party and where she is headed. The chasm has only grown wider in the wake of the 2008 presidential campaign as both her supporters and detractors have grown increasingly bold in offering their candid assessments about her (and each other) in the media.
Palin’s memoir of the 2008 campaign — entitled “ Going Rogue” and due on bookshelves on Nov. 17 — is sure to inflame both sides of that divide. Meg Stapleton, a spokeswoman for Palin, declined to comment on the back and forth between Schmidt, Coale and others saying simply: “The Governor will write about all of this in her book. There will be plenty of time to talk about it then.”
All of the attention that Schmidt’s comments have attracted is yet more evidence of the fact that Palin is a — if not the — prime mover in the Republican party. If she does ultimately run for president (and there are strong arguments to be made on each side), it’s almost certain the the race would boil down to Palin and a single candidate — former Gov. Mitt Romney (Mass.), Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty etc — who would become the rallying point for the anti-Palin forces.
Until then, the forces who support her and those that oppose her will continue to reinforce their positions — a process that could turn the 2012 presidential nominating fight into one of the most memorable in history.
Articles of interest:
Letterman apologizes again to Palin, sort of
Palin article an example of AC-T bias against conservatives
Palin book part of conservative boom
The Insignificance of Sarah Palin
“Going Rogue” rises without Oprah’s Help
Let me get this straight. John McCain is a RINO that has abandoned the conservative roots of the party? I wonder why Ms. Palin allowed the McCain camp to use her good name during the 2008 presidential elections. And why did Ms. Palin keep heaping praise on him, like “Great American”. They must have temporarily duped her. I can’t wait to read the book.
Yes, PJ, John McCain is one that some would consider a RINO. He is an extremely liberal Republican. If you are one of the “conservative base” then that is by all means the textbook definition of a RINO. Conservatives believe they are Republicans BECAUSE of their conservative views, so it is contradictory to those beliefs for someone to claim (or appear) to be a “liberal” Republican. It’s an oxymoron.
I don’t think I would say that the McCain campaign duped Palin. I think that McCain is a RINO but I would still classify him as a “Great American.” He just happens to be a “Great American” who has views that differ a great deal from mine. I honestly think that this is something that liberals really don’t get about conservatives. We can disagree, as a collective, with a politician, without having hate for that person. It is the policies that we take issue with, not the personality. McCain is a war hero, no one can take that from him. I salute him and thank him for his sacrifice.
If Palin thought McCain was a RINO and still agreed to run with him, how does that lead you to claim that she must have been duped? If Palin is a “Great American” and wanted to lend “her good name” for the betterment of our country, how can you take issue with that? I would argue that if Palin thought McCain to be a RINO and refused his nomination, then she would have been doing a disservice to her fellow Americans. The VP does hold council with the POTUS. At least in that capacity she would have a conservative voice in the White House, had the pair been successful. Many, many conservatives voted McCain, simply because of the possibility of having that conservative voice in the WH.
But I’m with you…I can’t wait to read the book. I pre-ordered from http://www.booksamillion.com.
Woot! Woot! WAY TO GO NATALIE!!!!!!!!!! Take that PJ, something you liberals just can’t understand.
Oh, and let’s not forget that Palin said many times through out the campaign that her and John had different views on many things, but he never asked her to leave her opinions at the door.
It’s called checks-and balances…something else liberals just don’t get.
Sissy:
Just for the record, “checks and balances” refers to the distribution of power between the 3 branches of Federal Government, not to the VP being a check on the President. But sure, the VP could be a check on the President if the VP had any real political power. Most Presidential candidates are actually picking a VP that they think will take up their mantle in the event of their death, not as a check, but as a way of ensuring a continuity.
Natalie:
I see that the conservative base is calling Senator McCain a RINO, I was just not seeing it during the campaign. Maybe everyone was just thinking “ok, he is a RINO, but there is NO WAY I can vote for the liberal, and he did bring in Sarah, so OK I will vote for McCain”.
Here are some other Palin quotes from 2008:
“Ladies and gentlemen, perhaps no accolade we hear this week is better proof that we’ve chosen the right man.” (refering to the McCain as the right man to lead the Republican Party at the 2008 convention)”
“…we are expected to govern with integrity, and goodwill, and clear convictions, and a servant’s heart. Now, no leader in America has shown these qualities so clearly or present so clear a threat to business as usual in Washington as Senator John S. McCain”
It just doesn’t sound to me like she thinks he is a RINO. It sounds to me like a change of tune.
You’ve got to be kidding me. See PJ, this is a prime example of reading into other people’s post or articles, to take your arguments to a different place, other than what was intended.
Where in my comment did I refer to checks and balances as it applies to the federal government? Where?
There are checks and balances in business, there are checks and balances in schools, there are checks and balances in just about every aspect of life.
Now, the intelligent person would know exactly what I am talking about. But, to make it easy on you, I will elaborate.
Two people (or beliefs) with some opposing views have a better ability to keep each other honest, and in check, than two people with the same views. Now, so you don’t twist the “honesty” part, I am referring to an instance were one person can lead the other person to think, or consider, something that they may or may not have thought, or considered, otherwise.
Do you understand, or do I have to simplify it more?
Okay, I’ll say it: Even though I am no friend of the GOP as it is today, I would vote for Palin without hesitation.
My dream ticket? Keyes and Palin 2012.
Sissy:
Sorry, I just could resist point out what “checks and balances” normally means in the context of federal government after your snide “…something else liberals just don’t get” cheap shot. It was not very nice of me.
Your point that Ms. Palin has pointed out on many occasions that she is NOT in lockstep with the McCain camp, and was never asked to be, is a good one. I am just pointing out that the tune has changed quite a bit with regard to Senator McCain and how he is treated. I wonder if everyone would be talking about what a RINO he is if he and Palin had won the white house in 2008. (I think not)
I have to disagree with you PJ, I think many would still be calling McCain a RINO had he won. No different than some of the ones who voted for Obama based on his persona, now claim that it is his persona that may be getting in his way. Kind of like stweart now critizing him for being in front of the media so much.
There are no blanket veiws with either party, nor is there a fine line with either side. With the GOP you have moderates, right and far-right. With the Dems you have moderates, left and far-left.
Maybe that slipped your mind momentarily, because I am pretty sure you already knew this.
Chet:
What do you think of the conventional wisdom that says “The right is more disciplined” than the left. Basically the argument says that in the Republican Party, Reagan’s rule that you DON’T criticize a fellow Republican publicly has been taken to heart. That essentially, once there is a nominee, everyone falls into line like a “good soldier”, sets differences aside, and all pull together for the common good. Do you think that was happening during the 2008 election? Are Republicans really better than Democrats at that? If that conventional wisdom is true, Does Ms. Palin threaten that discipline?
I have to make this quick. The discipline you speak of “generally” regards fiscal discipline, i.e. “fiscal repsonsibility” which is a core value of “conservatives”. Palin threatens most of what republican and democrats politicians stand for today. The plus to that is that most of the public is tired of politicians on both sides of the isle too.
Palin breaks the mold of what we have come to accept as a typical politician, and that is why her popularity continues to grow.
later1