The American Spectator

Ken (Old Texican)| 8.18.09 @ 10:56AM

Hey Phillip

Many of us in the "center" appreciate her as well.

She says what a lot of us think. I personally enjoy her "celebrity" status. I hope her book does extremely well...
Heh! a nincompoop's book got one guy in the whitehouse. Maybe a thoughtful book written by Sarah will help her sharpen her national insights.
I wish her well.

Bob| 8.18.09 @ 11:28AM

Philip, the more the left can paint Palin as representative of the Republican party, the better off they will be. Over 60% of voters still think she is unqualified to be President and her negatives have risen dramatically. If I were on the left (most of you on the extreme right think I am), I would try to brand Republicans as Palin/Limbaugh as much as I could. Remember, Rod Blagojevich is also a celebrity as well as O.J.

Ken, you said:

"a thoughtful book written by Sarah"

Isn't that an oxymoron? Thanks for the humor.

Tim| 8.18.09 @ 11:42AM

Ring the bell, watch Bob drool. Clockwork.

Bob| 8.18.09 @ 11:45AM

Tim, I'd love to have Sarah get the Republican nomination in 2012. In fact, I will vote for her in the primaries just to put you right wing wackos in your place and return the Republican party to an historically, moderate stance.

JP| 8.18.09 @ 11:49AM

Palin has replaced Cheney and Rove. And it isn't an obsession, it is a tactic. The Left fears Palin and thus is pre-emptively branding her. We shall see how damaged she is come next year. If she can raise campaign cash for GOP candidates, the Left will have failed.

Bob,
What Moderate GOP era do you speak of? The GOP had moderate stances from 1952-1994 and they remained the minority party through out.

Tim| 8.18.09 @ 12:00PM

Don't take it so hard Bob, I'm just funnin ya.

Bob| 8.18.09 @ 12:09PM

JP, you've made my point. The GOP had moderate stances from 1952-1994 and from 2000-2008 and has won the Presidency more than Democrats. I would also claim that the Republicans had a moderate stance from 2000-2006 and were the majority party.

The problem with looking back at history is that the demographics have changed. Remember that Reagan won in 1980 with just 50.7% of the vote. If you applied today's demographics to that election, he would have lost.

In order to form a coalition for Bush, Rove positioned him as a "compassionate" conservative and cobbled together just enough votes to win. In 2004, he got 44% of the Hispanic vote. A move to the right will alienate the voting blocks that are growing -- Hispanics, blacks, and young voters. Your selective use of history may make you feel better, but they won't win national elections. Besides, the Republican party has morphed into the most regional/segregated group of voters in its history.

By the way, the left does not fear Palin, they are using her as a way to position Republicans. In advertising you always personify a group with specific individuals.

kaathy wilkinson| 8.18.09 @ 12:22PM

she's a little kooky, a little bit unhingedf, a little bit dramatic but she is a lot like most of us outside of New York, Chicago(heaven forbid) and California. She is a lot more of America than most of you would like to believe

K1MJS| 8.18.09 @ 12:47PM

Comparing Palin to McCarthy is an insult to McCarthy. McCarthy was a nut and did a lot of harm. Palin is a nut but her continual fabrications designed only to inflame rather than inform are basically seen, by thoughful people, for what they are - rantings of a nut. Bring Tina Fey back.

Bob| 8.18.09 @ 1:11PM

Kaathy (?) Wilkinson -- Think of it this way. Would you go to a doctor who didn't know much about medicine? Would you go to a doctor that got his degree at Harvard or would you go to someone who got his degree in Bermuda? Would you call in a plumber who didn't know the plumbing code? So why would you vote for a President that didn't know much about foreign policy or economics or the Constitution?

Palin has had a chance over these past 8 months to take some time and learn something about these subjects, but she has not. She is intellectually incurious and does not care to know the fact necessary to become President. That is the problem. She is smart enough, she just doesn't have the desire to learn. To her, this is just another beauty contest. More people are beginning to realize this -- but it was obvious to many of us moderates that this was the case during the election.

spike| 11.17.09 @ 10:03AM

"So why would you vote for a President that didn't know much about foreign policy or economics or the Constitution? "

Bob, you already did that...his name is Obama

PALIN 2012| 8.18.09 @ 1:19PM

You guys are the real lunatics if you dismiss Palin. She's a threat to the democrats and they know it: She perfectly timed her "Death Panel" comments and helped kill ObamaCare.

Unlike McCain, Sarah Palin is the true maverick.

Jenn| 8.25.09 @ 3:54PM

Want to see a liberal freak out? Post a tweet on Twitter about Sarah Palin and watch the hate spew forth. It is very entertaining. They hate her more than they hate President Bush.