Gay Patriot Header Image

Sarah Can Wait

Those who read this blog know that I’m a strong supporter of the Governor of Alaska.  Aware of her accomplishments, standing up–and defeating–many of the corrupt politicians in the Last Frontier, all of them male,* I know Sarah Palin is capable of the Herculean task of cleaning the Augean stables iof our nation’s capital, made ever more squalid by the “stimulus.” 

That said, given her relative youth (she’s just 45) and her limited knowledge of national issues, I believeshe should wait to run for president.  Moreover, the more experience she has as chief executive of the nation’s (geographically) largest state, the more she will demonstrate her leadership capacity.  And she’ll have more time to become well-versed on issues of which she demonstrated only a cursory understanding in the 2008 campaign.

Unlike Barack Obama in 2008, there’s no fierce urgency for Sarah Palin to run for president in the election immediately following her “debut” on the national stage.  Obama had to run last year when the memory of his 2004 Democratic National Convention speech was still fresh.  The more time passed since that speech, the more manifest would his absence of accomplishments become.

Palin had already made significant accomplishments when John McCain tapped her last August as his running mate.  Indeed, it was those accomplishments which drew her to his attention.

She only need continue to govern in the manner she has governed.  If her record is any guide, her accomplishments will increase with her time in office.  

To secure her place on the national stage, she need supplement her leadership by doing what she began in the campaign, familiarizing herself with national issues.  She has shown herself to be a quick study.  The more time she devotes to these issues, the better prepared she will be handle aggressive media interviews and so convince more Americans of her readiness to lead.

*which should make her a heroine to feminists.  I mean, aren’t feminists supposed to love women who take down power-hungry men?

Share

28 Comments

  1. Perhaps another reason to wait is that all of her foibles will begin to fade from memory. But they may be to numerous for even 8 years to erase. And Palin will need to be more than “a quick study” to secure her place on the national stage. Knowing something is one thing, but applying it is something else entirely, and I am not convinced based on her performance thus far that she is capable of that. We don’t need a president who operates from a cheat sheet.

    Comment by Inlookout — February 16, 2009 @ 5:08 pm - February 16, 2009

  2. Inlookout, I’m not entirely certain what you’re trying to say in your comment, nor does it seem you know what you’re saying

    You seem to harbor a bias against the Alaska Governor based not on her record, but on her performance in a few interviews (your “foibles”) in last fall’s campaign.

    Are you aware of her record as Governor and how the leadership she has showed in Alaska shows an ability to execute (which the incumbent chief executive seems to lack)? And that with increased knowledge of national issues, she can put her leadership ability to good use on the national stage.

    Comment by GayPatriotWest — February 16, 2009 @ 5:48 pm - February 16, 2009

  3. Thank you GPW, for an extremely well-written and insightful take on my new favorite leader. While I anxiously await Gov. Palin’s return to the national spotlight, I believe you’ve made a great case for her continued demonstration of true leadership and reform in her state.

    I believe she will age just as well politically as she has physically (full disclosure: I’ve seen her speak in person, and there is no more beautiful creature than Sarah…Hollywood’s got nothin’ on her!)

    Keep up the great work GPW, and I’ll continue reading!

    Comment by AF_Vet — February 16, 2009 @ 7:15 pm - February 16, 2009

  4. She is interesting, for sure. Her wake exposed the squalid stalls in both parties. How the entrenched are threatened by her!!!

    Perhaps what was most interesting last year was the point when she gave up on the McCain staff and began to go her own way a bit.

    I too, have my doubts she’s savvy enough to rebound from the pummeling she took last year. I do hope you’re right Dan, some additional time as Alaska’s governor will give her the foundation she’ll need to rebound on the national stage. We’ll see.

    Comment by Patrick — February 16, 2009 @ 10:39 pm - February 16, 2009

  5. I read the article linked here and what I found more interesting were the comments that followed it. I was struck by the one that questioned Lafferty’s comments about Palins supposed photographic memory – photographic memory is great, but its genetic and has nothing to do with intelligence.

    Palin has already proven herself as a charming speaker whose facts and logic can be easily and quickly scratched away. The whole “no thanks” to federal funds for the bridge to nowhere was de-bunked almost from the moment she made the statement. Her own words, videos, etc proved that she wholeheartedly supported this project and its federal funding until it became a political hot potato and she changed not only her mind but attempted to rewrite her history of support for it as well. Many politicians change their minds, go back on their campaign promises (from all parties, thanks very much) but the assertiveness with which she lied about her support was beyond arrogant.

    Comment by Kevin — February 16, 2009 @ 11:05 pm - February 16, 2009

  6. I harbor a prejudice against Mrs. Palin like you do President Obama. I don’t like her politics, and I think she is dumb. Americans aren’t falling for another “aah shucks” idiot. Republicans would be wise to start searching for leaders less socially conservative and more intellectual if they hope to make gains. America is growing, and if they want to stay blind, stupid and ignorant that is their choice to live with.

    Comment by DaveA — February 16, 2009 @ 11:59 pm - February 16, 2009

  7. Dave A.

    Barack Obama is doing his very utmost to liken himself to Abraham Lincoln. A comparison liberals are more than happy to echo (even though most have very little knowledge of the man) as Lincoln is considered by most the greatest or second greatest president in American history, and only comparisons to the very best will do for their “messiah”.

    If Lincoln were running for office today, useful idiots such as yourself would undoubtedly mock him as blind, stupid and ignorant as both his parents were illiterate, he was deeply religious, and he completed little more than one year of formal schooling.

    Sarah Palin, while religious, has done virtually nothing to govern as a social conservative, instead concentrating on reform and fiscal conservatism. She has accomplished a great deal that has evaded many of her predecessors, certainly more than either man on the Democrat ticket, and after one month in a national campaign was able to communicate a more thorough understanding of the Constitution and Constitutional role of the Vice President than a man who has sat atop the Judiciary Committee for much of his 36 years in the Senate.

    Your opinion of Sarah Palin is clearly based on what you were told to believe by media and campaign propaganda and very little to do with the facts.

    In other words you are an intellectually incurious and easily manipulated BOOB who is clearly unqualified to be criticizing anyone else’s intellect.

    Comment by American Elephant — February 17, 2009 @ 12:57 am - February 17, 2009

  8. The funny part is that leftist fool DaveA actually believes that Americans support his tax cheat President who supports and endorses other tax cheats like Daschle, Solis, Geithner, and Rangel, as well as his bribe-flinging friends like Burris and Blagojevich.

    Obama is the best thing that ever happened for conservativism; he demonstrates the fact that leftists like himself and his syncophants like DaveA and their fellow Obama Party members who support tax increases don’t pay their own taxes, and who attack others for being corrupt pay bribes and demand bribes for political offices and favors.

    Comment by North Dallas Thirty — February 17, 2009 @ 1:17 am - February 17, 2009

  9. Sorry, Kevin, wrong yet again, the contention that she lied in her convention speech was debunked almost from the moment left-wing blogs & the MSM trotted out the accusation.

    Yup, she did change her mind, but so do a lot of people.

    But, I’m glad to know now that you think the president is a liar. If it’s a lie to change one’s mind on an issue, then Barack Obama has committed a number of whoppers, most notably on declining federal funding of his presidential campaign so he would have no spending limits.

    I could go on. From now on, if ever you defend the president in a comment, I may just remind you that, by your standards, Barack Obama is a liar.

    Oh, and, do you Palin-haters ever consider her accomplishments as governors or just focus on her “foibles” on the campaign trail (as one critic might put it) and the accusations (nearly all debunked) trotted out by left-wing bloggers.

    Comment by GayPatriotWest — February 17, 2009 @ 1:47 am - February 17, 2009

  10. i don’t think readiness will be a factor in palin’s future as a national candidate. she may be a quick study, and she may be able to memorize talking points on health care, the economy and foreign policy, but she may not ever be able to rehabilitate her brand, which was compromised during the campaign. the proper question, in my view, is whether palin can rehabilitate her image enough such that the american public gives her a second chance.

    palin was a polarizing figure. the gop base loved her and will continue to love her in the future, but in order to be a viable candidate, she will need to broaden her appeal. i think that will present her with an uphill climb. during the campaign, she had the highest polling negatives of any candidate (pres or VP). and her political opponents aren’t going to let the public forget about her disastrous interviews with katie couric and charlie gibson.

    i’m skeptical. i don’t think the american public is that forgiving, and if recent history is a guideline, there’s no precedent for losing VP candidates going on to become viable national candidates (edwards, lieberman, kemp, quayle, ferrarro…).

    [Chad, Chad, please study American history. There is a precedent for a losing VP candidate to become a viable national candidate. Just familiarize yourself with the presidential campaign of James M. Cox in 1920 and inquire into the name of his running mate (which should be familiar to you). Cox ran 26 points behind Warren G. Harding that year.

    Oh, and, once time passes and Palin continues to do as well in interviews as she did in the second half of the campaign, those, like you, who keep reminding the public of her "disastrous interviews" (as you put it) with Gibson and Couric, will look like you're dwelling the past. I wrote this post because I believe Mrs. Palin should wait about as long as did Mr. Cox's running mate before she announces her own bid for the White House, at a time when Katie Couric will be as much a part of the political landscape as Dan Rather is today. --Dan]

    Comment by Chad — February 17, 2009 @ 2:20 am - February 17, 2009

  11. ugh…i know history. i was very careful to state that *recent* history doesn’t provide a precedent for palin’s future success. if you have to go back to the 1920s to give a singular example that contradicts me, then your argument isn’t that persuasive.

    my comment wasn’t meant as an attack on palin, so i encourage you to read it in the spirit in which it was written. your argument is that she just needs more time in the bottle in order to be a viable candidate; my argument is that familiarity with the issues may not be sufficient. she needs to repair her damaged brand and convince the majority of voters the she has the aptitude to be a leader on the national stage. even you seem to concede that some rehabilitation is necessary, or why else would you emphasize her improved performance in later interviews? her rehabilitation efforts were clearly not enough to change the outcome of the election, so what does she need to do going forward? do you really think that all she needs to do is read up more? like i said, i’m skeptic and i think it will take a lot more.

    Comment by Chad — February 17, 2009 @ 3:07 am - February 17, 2009

  12. The lefties, being intellectually incurious boobs, compare Palin’s performance 2 weeks into her first national campaign ever with Obama’s performance two YEARS into campaigning.

    But play the video for them of Obama calling for breathalyzers for asthma patients, saying he had visited 57 states with three to go, commenting on all the fallen soldiers in his audience, the 10,000 people killed in a Kansas tornado, decrying that we haven’t sent Arab translators to Afghanistan where the people don’t speak Arab, etc, etc, etc… and their eyes glaze over, their fingers go in their ears and they simply refuse to acknowledge the video even exits.

    And yet for all his supposed brilliance, he has been so thoroughly incompetent in his first month that whoever is really in charge has kicked him out of the White House and made him go back out on the campaign trail cus its the only thing he has ever actually done.

    Comment by American Elephant — February 17, 2009 @ 4:05 am - February 17, 2009

  13. Filtered, Dan.

    Comment by American Elephant — February 17, 2009 @ 4:06 am - February 17, 2009

  14. From #1: “We don’t need a president who operates from a cheat sheet.”

    So you’re basically admitting that we don’t need the current con-artist-in-chief. Thanks for clarifying.

    Comment by Vic — February 17, 2009 @ 9:00 am - February 17, 2009

  15. The electorate will not be allowed to “forget” Sarah Palin’s “foibles,” as the Left continues to take random potshots at her, lest the people MIGHT forget.

    Dr. Dean Edell, who hosts a call-in medical advice show on radio, regularly roasted President Bush–for his foolish war, for failing to fund embryonic stem-cell research, heck, for being religious. He still speaks scathingly of Bush, but has added attacks on Palin. His last attack, a couple of weeks ago, began as a diatribe against Palin because of her daughter’s out-of-wedlock pregnancy (okay, arguably “medical”), then went on to denounce Palin because she might have had some role in her daughter’s fiance’s getting a job for which he was not technically qualified–not that she DID influence his hiring but that Dr. Edell WONDERED if maybe she had. Dr. Dean Edell, medical doctor and wannabe political pundit.

    I love Sarah Palin. I can’t imagine her proclaiming, as Obama has, that without Porkulus, we would likely sink further into the abyss and perhaps never emerge. But I believe conservatives’ affection for her only impresses on the Left the necessity of continuing their attacks on her.

    Still, the Left never quit denigrating Ronald Reagan, and somehow he became a very effect president. Maybe….

    Comment by polly — February 17, 2009 @ 10:55 am - February 17, 2009

  16. All the libtards who are bitching and moaning about Palin’s supposed “ignorance” are the same ones who elected a president with a limited experience of government and no outstanding qualifications to speak of.

    As I said in an earlier thread, he’s our first-ever affirmative-action president.

    Prove me wrong.

    Regards,
    Peter H.

    Comment by Peter Hughes — February 17, 2009 @ 11:01 am - February 17, 2009

  17. Dan writes: “I believe she should wait to run for president.” I agree with that sentiment, Dan, if by it you mean Gov Palin should not make a run for the nomination in 2012. She shouldn’t, however, retreat to the sidelines in the 2010 or 2012 campaigns… she ought to help GOPers get elected everywhere… from mayor to Senator.

    She needs some seasoning, needs to gain some gravitas, build inroads to the GOP leadership in each state, earn her political stripes on the natl stage and allow the GOP to put forward a strong fiscal conservative in the next election to balance Obama & Congressional Democrat excesses.

    When RR ran in 1976, his time was premature. He took that defeat and went to work building inroads to state GOP leaders, amassing contributors, gaining gravitas, etc. If Gov Palin follows RR’s track record, she’ll be ready and primed by 2016 or 2020.

    Comment by Michigan-Matt — February 17, 2009 @ 12:40 pm - February 17, 2009

  18. Sarah Palin was the only candidate out of the entire field with executive experience. McCain¨s career was in Congress and Senate, Obama a 142 day U.S Senator, and his time in the Illinois Senate was lackluster with 146 present votes (no stand). Biden, a career senator. Bob Barr, a former congressman, Chuck Baldwin, a Baptist minister. So by 2012, Sarah could make a case for her preparedness to be President. Also, Bobby Jindal will have had comparable experience. It will come down to who worked more for Republican candidates and will have built a base of support.

    Comment by Roberto — February 17, 2009 @ 2:47 pm - February 17, 2009

  19. Emotions are still high about Sarah Palin. I wonder if she will run for the Senate to use that as a stage for further progress in her career. She did wonderfully well and scared the daylights out of Democrats, hence the smears, many based on Tina Fey parody, not Palin statements.

    As far as Obama is concerned, I think he was running for VP and everyone expected Hillary to win the nomination. He was a little like John Kennedy in 1956 when Stevenson, to add some excitement to a dull convention, threw open the VP nomination. Kennedy quickly organized a campaign although he lost to Kefauver. That effort gave him the momentum to win in 1960.

    What happened instead is that Hillary stumbled as she had no plan after Super Tuesday. It was her weakness, rather than his own talents, that pushed Obama into the nomination. He was not ready. Now, after winning over a weak candidate in a disastrous financial meltdown that should have doomed McCain to a blowout, Obama has to learn how to govern. So far, he is not doing well. Geithner looks to be a disaster. Burris is giving us a course on where Obama came from. There is still time but the president’s start is the worst since Harrison died a month into his term.

    Comment by Mike K — February 17, 2009 @ 6:16 pm - February 17, 2009

  20. I guess I’m a bigot in assuming that my (conservative) GLBT brothers & sisters would prize intelligence and intellectual curiosity as a virtue. The whole right-wing media has sought to make intelligence and education something un-American- you know “Intellectuals, East & West Coast Elites (What the Hell is George Bush!?), Homosexuals and atheists” are all Un-American anarchists.

    So here you are praising Sarah Palin for being being a “road-kill scholar.” Obama, like RINO Lincoln, JFK, FDR & other great presidents is actually reflective, well read and erudite. WHAT A CRIME AGAINST AMERICA!

    Yeah, this country would be so much better off if we had leaders like Joe the Plumber, Sarah the party-girl, and W. the Affirmative-Action Cheerleader (what else is a college legacy, really, but a quota system based on parentage?). Yeah, I’m a conservative, so I’ll trust Joe & his buddies to get us out of the mess we’re in!

    About Sarah? Yes, she’s a populist- from a state that prides itself on it’s intellectual ignorance and intestinal fortitude. A shining paradigm of the rough talking, fast shooting territory of Alaska, whose entire population is less than 27 of the country’s largest cities.

    A woman who complained about the big-time government spenders, but who took $7 million in pork to build a hockey rink in her town; who wants $40 billion federal dollars to build a gas pipeline that won’t be repaid, but will pay royalties to Alaska. And then there’s that bridge- she may have opposed it after the moose s**t hit the snow machine, but she still spent the money on Alaskan pork!!!

    Taking on the oil companies- Yeah, she’s a real free market advocate. She sued them to get more royalties (taxes) for the State, not out of any environmental concerns.

    She is a member of a religion that advocated publically advocates that LGBT’s are intrinsically evil, not entitled to ANY protection under the law- Employment, Housing or GOD FORBID (Literally) even the same rights as heterosexual couples (I’m not talking about marriage here! Just basic rights- hospital visitation, estate law, etc._

    Her daughter is exhibit A for her support of Abstinence-only education.

    Her two oldest kids are poster children for underage drinking and drug use.

    Her “future” in-law has been arrested as a crystal-meth dealer (great for the Circuit- The Sno-Ball in Nome!),

    Her husband was a member of a group that advocated violent, and then non-violent, secession from the U.S.- Yeah a real patriot!.

    And, oh yes, she has great foreign-policy experience because Alaska is geographically “close” to Russia. Hey, I live in Florida- I must be an “expert” in Caribbean and Mexican diplomacy- They’re just across the Gulf from where I live. And I’ll be a first responder when Castro attacks the U.S.!

    Gay Conservatives? Talk about oxy-morons. Roy Cohn was a Gay Conservative, and he served Joe McCarthy really well

    Fiscal Conservatives? No problem- except that the largest economic messes we’ve seen since the turn of the 19th century were all created under “free market” policies of fiscal conservatives who simply borrowed and spent, without any responsibility to future generations. Maybe they were all Gay & figured they wouldn’t have children to carry all the debt they caused by trickle-down economics.

    Reagan always did seem a little limp-wristed to me. And we all know: it’s in the genes!

    Comment by ptownrob — February 18, 2009 @ 12:00 am - February 18, 2009

  21. I would like to know how NDT knows I do not pay taxes? Typical right wing drivel. The man doesn’t even know me, and he is claiming I am a tax cheat. Maybe he should spend less time going to Bear retreats and more time thinking about his responses.

    Comment by DaveA — February 18, 2009 @ 12:12 am - February 18, 2009

  22. Because, DaveA, if you did pay taxes, you would not put up for one minute with the fact that the Obama Party and Obama demand that you pay more while they refuse to pay at all.

    Then again, you may be that brainwashed.

    Comment by North Dallas Thirty — February 18, 2009 @ 12:57 am - February 18, 2009

  23. #20

    Does your mother know you’re a mindless Kool-Aid drinking lemming?

    Comment by ThatGayConservative — February 18, 2009 @ 5:18 am - February 18, 2009

  24. I guess I’m a bigot in assuming that my (conservative) GLBT brothers & sisters would prize intelligence and intellectual curiosity as a virtue.

    I mean, where’s the intelligence and intellectual curiosity in vommitting the same, tired, disproven liberal lies?

    What a fuckin’ tool.

    Comment by ThatGayConservative — February 18, 2009 @ 5:21 am - February 18, 2009

  25. #6: Republicans would be wise to start searching for leaders less socially conservative and more intellectual if they hope to make gains.

    Intellectualism, politically, is spectrum-neutral; it’s neither right nor left and both sides have their intellectuals. Liberty from government is implied to be reactionary (actually, there is some truth to that — especially given our current federal one-party rule) and reactionaries are considered anti-intellectual. The left rule(s) our academic institutions, but they do not in fact define intellect.

    William F. Buckley was an intellectual to his fingertips by anyone’s definition and he hated the elitist attitude of leftist academics who sneer at people like Palin — successful in a realm they think is exclusively theirs. (“I’d rather entrust the government of the United States to the first 400 people listed in the Boston telephone directory than to the faculty of Harvard University.“)

    Comment by Ignatius — February 19, 2009 @ 12:57 am - February 19, 2009

  26. #6- If you ever heard William F. Buckley you would know that he thought Gingrich & W. were absolute morons- and not reall conservatives. Buckley was as elitist as they come.

    You’ll also notice that Buckley said the first one hundred people in the BOSTON phone book- I doubt he would have made been so trusting of the first 100 people in the WASILLA Alaska phone book, especially since the 50 of them probably can’t read to begin with!

    Think about it!

    Comment by ptownrob — February 19, 2009 @ 3:25 pm - February 19, 2009

  27. Tell you what- Lets give Sarah & Obama puzzle maps of the United States,. Who do you think will do better? Then let’s give them a list of the ten amendments without their numbers- guess who would know them better. Let’s ask them both to name all the SUpreme Court Justices; to identify the state capitals of the 50, ok, 57 states.

    Basic civics- I think Sarah was probably out doing booze, crystal & crack with her buddies behind the high school during class time. Where else would her ckids learn to do drugs so well?

    Comment by ptownrob — February 19, 2009 @ 3:29 pm - February 19, 2009

  28. [...] Palin is relatively young (politically speaking).   She can wait until 2016 or 2020 to run for President.  She can put off her political career, but she can’t [...]

    Pingback by GayPatriot » Is Palin stepping down to put her children first? — July 6, 2009 @ 8:18 pm - July 6, 2009

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.