Then, next time, say that, and don't just haphazardly throw up something just because you feel it "obligatory." Saves a lot of grief all around.
black johann | 07.10.09 - 9:43 am | #

Sorry, I have to think that we are better off in this world being led by wisdom of the simple folk like Sarah Palin, than we are by the diabolically manipulative likes of Obama (or even McCain for that matter). Reagan had the same kind of critics who felt that he was too simple, but the truth of the matter is, leadership is not a matter of intelligence, but a matter of getting the right people to accomplish what is necessary to keep the country from falling into complete chaos. Sarah Palin, when she was not being manipulated by the likes of McCain and his sychophants, truly lifted the hearts of Americans to decency and honor, and that is the most important thing for a leader to do.
shmikey | 07.10.09 - 9:45 am | #

Sarah Palin is nobody's victim. If you don't see her for the power-hungry, savvy politician she is, you're delusional.

Also,you might want to come up with a more literate moniker than "clown" for our president - isn't that the sort of language that was despised when Bush was president/
Amy | 07.10.09 - 9:59 am | #

That's probably a good point. Although I think intelligence in a leader is important, it's not as important as well-grounded principle, proper aims, and especially being unsusceptible to manipulation.

I don't know whether Palin has those other qualities or not-- I'm kind of ambivalent on her at the moment. But there is a tendency among the highly-educated (and highly intelligent) to prize that more than it deserves.
DBP | 07.10.09 - 10:01 am | #

Sarah Palin is nobody's victim. If you don't see her for the power-hungry, savvy politician she is, you're delusional.

Should we then assume that our president, who is no clown, is nonetheless a power-hungry, savvy politician? FWIW, I think ‘the clown’ was referring to old foot-in-mouth Biden (who I like as a person, just admit he’s about as bumbling as they come).
Dave G. | 07.10.09 - 10:05 am | #

shmikey:

What makes you suppose Sarah Palin is "simple folk"?

Amy:

I was referring to Biden, who is a clown. And if you don't think Trig Palin retard jokes constitute assaults on common human decency then I don't much give a shit what you think. She could be Lucretia Borgia and it would still be evil and wrong to speak thus of her children. Your hatred is showing.
Mark P. Shea | Homepage | 07.10.09 - 10:21 am | #

If Palin was a typical power-hungry politician, I don't see why she would have resigned. That makes no sense.

I admire Palin for her mavericky ways, but I tend to agree with Mark that I wouldn't want to see her as President (though of course someone I'd be a lot MORE frightened of as President actually *IS* President.)
Dave Mueller | Homepage | 07.10.09 - 10:33 am | #

The US would by WAY better off with Sarah Palin as President instead of Obama. And by the US, I include those Americans not born yet.

Here's why: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9...h? v=9IR3HdyeXRo.
HOH | 07.10.09 - 11:42 am | #

It is also possible that the people who defend her decision to resign (thus saving Alaska millions of dollars) don't think she's perfect or blameless.
Jeff | 07.10.09 - 11:54 am | #

One commentator (I forget who it was) said something to this effect,

"Sara Palin committed the fatal sin of modern politics: she was bad on TV."

I believe there's truth to this comment. To all appearances, Palin was a rather effective executive. As has been repeated often, she had more executive experience than either Biden or Obama.

However, even a supporter like me has to admit that she did not come off well on TV during unscripted moments, especially as edited and filtered through a hostile media. Her interviews with Charlie Gibson and Katie Couric were disasters. I don't think her reputation ever recovered from the fallout that these interviews generated.

Was Palin qualified to be vice-president? In answer, I would repeat the old comic's joke:

Question: How's your wife?
Answer: Compared to what?

Perhaps Palin was not qualified for the office in some abstract sense. However, she was not running against Abraham Lincoln or George Washington.

She was running against ...

Joe Biden.

I believe she and McCain were the least bad choice in a lousy field. I also have little doubt she would have made a competent vice-president.
TGC | 07.10.09 - 12:07 pm | #

Mark, why do you hate Sarah Palin?
Gary Keith Chesterton | 07.10.09 - 12:25 pm | #

Mark,
Because she had the audacity to allow herself to have hope in the common folk. I have followed her comments and folow her twitters, and find that she doesn't have much political suave, but just tells it like it is. She wassn't prepared for the national scene,and was easily manipulated, and given bad advice. Like most of us who would be thrown into such a situation, I conjecture that she did it because she felt obligated to, but wasn't ready for the demands. I have been involved in politics in the past, and tried to help a devout Catholic run for a US Senate seat, and watched him get manipulated by really bad national advisors, so I have a little knowledge in what goes on. People like Palin go in with Rosey Glasses and get the glitter wiped off as soon as the jackals get their paws on them. I still think that she is a genuine article. I may be wrong, and she may be a jackal herself, but that is yet to be seen.
shmikey | 07.10.09 - 12:29 pm | #

Mark,
Why do you hate Nancy Kerrigan?
Michael | 07.10.09 - 1:00 pm | #

The McCain/Palin situation reminded me a bit of Bush/Quayle. Beltway GOP candidate and his cronies select a more conservative VP candidate from somewhere in the hinterlands to shore up the base. Then they freak out and try to distance themselves from her when she actually speaks to that base. When the media predictably savages her, they abandon her to her fate and even throw a few stones of their own.

McCain should have just been honest and picked a VP candidate he could believe in, like Lieberman or Clinton, instead of one from the part of the party he hates.
Aaron | Homepage | 07.10.09 - 1:02 pm | #

I think Nancy Kerrigan should run for the GOP nomination in 2012.
mike the analyst | 07.10.09 - 2:38 pm | #

Why is it that whenever someone says something critical of Palin, everyones response is, "Well, she's better than Obama!"

That's like me saying, "Spam is a rather low quality meat..." and having everyone respond, in a defensive manner, "Well, atleast its better than week old Scrapple!!"

Sure, I guess it is, but that doesn't make it good... And I'm not sure that its related to the discussion at hand...
Leo | 07.10.09 - 4:01 pm | #

Leo,

They might be answering those who are not saying Spam is bad, but better than week old Scrapple, but instead seem to think that Spam is as bad as it gets, while week old Scrapple is, in fact, superior to the best cut of filet.
Dave G. | 07.10.09 - 5:01 pm | #

I am sooo tired of "political geniuses"! Just give me someone with America's best interest at heart, who respects the work and the earnings of an American family, who respects the sacrifice it takes to keep America safe from her enemies and who understands how or dependence on foreigners for anything, especially energy puts us in a vunerible position. I want representatives with my values for human life, military sacrifices and hard work. I am tired of immoral savvy politicians. GOOO SARAH!
Isabelle | 07.11.09 - 1:55 am | #

I find the Andrew Sullivan posts bizarre -- is this not a childless man holding forth on the proper way to deliver a baby? I heard Charles Dodson once discuss with another male commentator how wonderful estrogen replacement therapy is for a marriage -- made me want to rip my hair out.

Sullivan is worse. When I go over his list of how strange the birth of Trigger was, all I can do is wonder if he even knows any woman who has ever had a child. Labor is kind of, well, a natural event. It's not a medical emergency. Maybe a first time mom would freak out when her water breaks, but by the time you've had two -- or three, or five -- you don't obsessively watch your navel (or any other abdominal feature) for hours and hours waiting for something to happen. You continue on with living, and you get close to home and family, and you go to a medical facility with people you trust in case something goes wrong. How insane is it to judge a VP candidate based on the size of the hospital she gave birth at?
Lisa | 07.11.09 - 2:04 pm | #

I guess I don't see how anyone can make an informed decision about whether or not Sarah Palin is "intelligent enough" to serve in a higher national office based on the the outrageous coverage of her over the past year. It's impossible to form a balanced opinion about her qualifications based on what we have been told about her by media gatekeepers.

In particular, I see absolutely no evidence that she is "incurious," which is something I see repeated constantly in press coverage, most recently by Peggy Noonan. Based on what evidence, exactly? A couple of high profile, hostile interviews by Gibson and Couric, apparently (which Palin appeared to demonstrate mainly a lack of media training rather than lack of knowledge). Then there are those who point fingers and say she never had a passport till age 40. Well, neither did I, and it wasn't because I was "incurious" about the world. I was spending my travel money on graduate school, marriage, children, expensive Catholic schools etc. People make all kinds of choices in life that rule out other attractive choices.

It simply desn't make sense to me that someone who has proven to be a successful leader on the homefront and local and statewide government is not smart enough for bigger things. She got the Alaska pipeline accomplished, for heaven's sake. She had an extremely high approval rating among her constituents before being pilloried on the national stage.

Bottom line. She's got all the raw material to be a national leader, and she's got time to bone up on the things she doesn't know yet.

We already have a national leader with a couple of Ivy League degrees and absolutely no paper trail whatsoever regarding his grades, legal opinions etc. Is he "smarter" than Sarah Palin? Sorry, I'm not convinced.

Give her time. I agree that it probably won't happen, and should not happen, in 2012. But people who are counting her out because she is "not smart enough" have obviously never run a state.
CV | 07.13.09 - 1:44 pm | #