is that it is generated by her enemies. She has some in camp angling for 2012, but most of the news and the efforts of guy like me come only after listening or reading so much garbage like Letterman calling her daughter a whore or losers on the McCain staff throwing her under the bus in some below the belt hit piece.

She is a mobilizer. I just cant sit and let that crap slide.

Actually, having finally located the original piece, I find it to be a mixed bag. Goldberg does recognize Sarah’s chrisma.

However, he runs off the rails when he accuses Sarah of playing the victim, talking about her “whining about unfair press coverage “. Well I don’t see that at all, and Sarh has never played the victim hitherto, which is why she is called the Saracuda.

What I see is Sarah fighting back, recognizing that what sank Bush was his passivity in the face of attack trying to be “above the fray”.

Unfortunately, Republicans have so long laid down that Jonah can’t recognize that trait and instead interprets that as victim-playing (which never stops the Democrats, by the way from pushing back). Instead, Jonah thinks that the Republicans need to redouble the passive strategy that has been working so well…NOT! That’s the classic definition of insanity.

Jonah, instead of buying into Sarah’s enemies’ interpretation (since no matter what she does, they will fault her), how about just keeping your mouth shut and observing what happens – that is, if you’re open to trying something different to change the ballgame. If she falls on here own, then so be it – but when you do her opponents’ work for them, you’re just stabbing her in the back.

Yes, there is good advice out there for Sarah that she could find helpful. But you don’t help when you let her opponents choose the playing field and set the rules and pick the referees.

Or let me appeal to Republican “niceness” since you seem to advocate that, and remind you of the first rule” “if you don’t have something good to say, don’t say it”. Not that I buy into “niceness” – but if you’re going to play that game, then you need to follow all the rules, not just the ones you find convenient.

The bit with Letterman was one of the few times she directly addressed it, and that was only because he insulted one of her children. She wouldn’t have given him a second thought if he had just been slamming her (frankly, it made my year seeing Letterman groveling to Sarah a week later when the crap hit the fan and he apologized. That had to absolutely kill him. Can’t imagine what he’s saying about her in private now.)

She also addressed the media coverage in the Ziegler documentary (Media Malpractice), and noted that she would be an interested observer of the coverage Caroline Kennedy would be receiving when she threw her hat in the ring for NY Senate. Neither time was she really complaining.

Sarah has taken more hits from the media than anyone in history and she usually rolls with it.

She certainly doesn’t complain as much as Obama who is constantly griping about Fox News. He apparently thinks that actual news coverage, as opposed to being in the tank for him, is unfair.

Quayle, “It’s the economy, stupid” Bush, W, Palin… The beat goes on. And as I stated, there is a preference for the unknown over the known.

I think the fact she’s been through an election, been thoroughly vetted and taken the heat makes her stronger. Not weaker.

Two weaks ago, Sanford looked good. All potential candidates have weaknesses that will be exploited. All of them will be made to look like fools in the press.

Palin represents a line in the sand with this type of character assassination.

I am essentially neutral to slightly negative on her as a candidate on her own merits and I’m absolutely baffled by the Sarah cult on RedState. I suspect it has something to do with a natural (over) reaction to what really were some horrible personal attacks made against her during and after the last campaign.

In any event, I do think that her supporters are deluding themselves with respect to her electability for national office. I’m too lazy to dig up the numbers, but the collapse of her numbers with independents between the GOP convention and the election was of unprecedented proportions. And while it’s true that the media’s quayling of her had a lot to do with that, it nonetheless is what it is. Quayle was never able to unquayle himself, and I don’t see why Sarah Palin is going to have any better luck.

-exits

She needs six years of governing to develop a meaningful legislative record (it’s a weakness for Romney also).

It’s hard to know whether Palin has been using her isolation in Alaska to master her brief on foreign policy and constitutional law. If she hasn’t, she truly has thrown away an opportunity of a lifetime.

Art,

Interesting article, and the stall in the Senate is not good, but I wonder how the issue of parental notification/permission for minors having abortion polls in Alaska, i.e. what the voter thinks about the issue.

Out here in CA, well we’ve have very tame parental notification restrictions on the ballot and they always fail. Not permission statutes but notification with judicial bypasses. Unfortunately even mild notification laws don’t pass in CA and I’m not sure how these sorts of efforts have fared in other states.

Is this a case of the Governor being out ahead of what the majority of the citizens in Alaska support or is she reflecting the sentiment of the citizens of the state on this matter?

…biting Sarah in the posterior?

And if these were Democratic holdovers, is her firing them a sign the she’s catching on to her Achilles heel – or was this another conflict at the interpersonal level?

Or were these her people? If so, this would bode ill for her political future.

If he’s *still* a Romney guy after all this time, Goldberg is not someone I’d want to take any kind of advice from.

But, then again, I’ve always had mostly disdain for the vast majority of the NRO crew…

If I remember correctly, Huckabee and McCain ganged up on him (i.e. West Virginia), Rudy knocked himself out by not campaigning till FL, Fred never got out the gate, Duncan Hunter failed to make any headway.

So who exactly had a chance to win that was “kneecapped” by Romney so that McCain won the nomination?

The only other people were Ron Paul and Alan Keyes.

[and some -- especially around here -- might suggest that they did]

The American people — even those among us who loved President Bush — were simply exhausted with the Republican Party.

The party insiders — dare I say the RMSP — had seen to it that no Republican had any prayer of winning the White House.

Then the backbiting, infighting and general nastiness of the primaries — some overt, much of it covert — guaranteed that ANYONE the Dems nominated — even a known Marxist — would wipe the floor with McCain.

What we need now is leadership — and it ain’t coming from Washington anytime soon.

She has the base, reluctant Republicans will fall in line if its a choice between Palin and Obama. But locking up the Republicans vote may not be enough.

I think Palin may be able to take some women voters away from Obama. Even five percent would change everything.

I think he is genuinely concerned about her electability, as am I.

acceptance speech and knocked it out of the park, the sheer delight that she aroused in so many of us hit the Dems and the beltway crowd exactly the same way– “Who is this ordinary woman and how DARE she elicit this response?!!!” The Dems acted as if we should have asked their permission to have her for VP candidate and the beltway crowd was deeply offended because Sarah Palin wasn’t an Ivy Leaguer, didn’t suck up to any of them for their approval, and she didn’t speak in those generic and soothing phrases that mean nothing.

She challenged every single one of them and they hated it. And good for her—no advice that any of them have given to us has advanced our cause. Indeed, these are the same deeply principled folks who congratulated Obama and criticized those who didn’t want to “just give him a chance.” He has had his chance. And so have they.

nt