Mr. Klein is a fine reporter, and his caution against treating Sarah Palin as an "instant celebrity" is well advised. Both Sarah and Obama fire up their audiences, it is true, so the instant celebrity comparison is valid so far as it goes. The difference is that Obama's appeal is based on his teleprompter-reading skills, and (if we believe the pundits) his "charisma." Obama's resume is thin, and that's being charitable. He has no record of accomplishment, simply because he has never accomplished anything. He is a hologram.
Sarah is Chief Executive of a large state, and she has really shaken things up, up there in wide-open Alaska, where the buffalo may not roam, but the moose and the caribou play -- until they end up in Sarah's gun-sights and dinner menu.
p>Which, by the way, was also the fate of Alaska's old-school self-serving politicians, regardless of political stripe. I like that. So do Alaskans. The lady's approval ratings are so high they're off the charts. Only a true leader could pull that off. She may have star quality, but she also has substance. br> --
ADVERTISEMENT
SPONSORED LINKS
The speech our President should make.
A noted economist fires back.
How political can you get?
You might have missed it, but it was boomed in January.
Farcical feminism is a decades-old phenomenon, as George Will's essay from 1970 reminds us.