How not to be a troll: Speak your peace, address criticism without non sequitors. If others persist in expressing opinions contrary to you own, let the matter rest.

Palin 2012

We’d probably have Obamacare and more, a weaker TPM, less Republicans in the House and Senate, and a few RINOs running for the 2012 presidential nomination. Some who couldn’t even beat McCain in 2008.

But thanks to the Left, we have Sarah Palin in the national scene.

The Lord truly does work in mysterious ways.

🙁

Worth knowing, CBDenver. Thanks.

However, according to this and this, the change was administrative (not legislative) and carried out by a Palin-appointed Attorney General.

Even though the new rules only took effect last December, I am more inclined than before to believe that Palin could have served out her term without financial ruin had she been determined to do so. However, the point is not cut and dried.

If you have links that override mine, please cite them.

2. Parker Says: Well gs, we just see things differently…

Apparently so. Just honest differences of opinion, afaic.

As I’ve said before, I like Daniels. He’s done well by Indiana. And, he’s willing to call a truce on social issues, which I think is a plus. But the 3 you mention, IMO, do not have the charisma to win. A significant number of voters cast their vote based upon what they perceive are the character traits of any given candidate.

IMO it is highly probable that by 11/12 we will be in an even deeper economic swamp than we are today. If that comes to pass, the uninformed will want a leader who comes across as an alpha male (or female) that offers a credible plan for draining the swamp. Perhaps I am reading things incorrectly, unlike Rush I am right only 74.3%; but I think it will take a candidate possessing a forceful personality to turn BHO into Humpty Dumpty.

“… if things get so bad that the normal rules don’t apply.”

We going to get past that point soon, but only 5% see the graffiti on the wall. Bursting bubbles, the credit bubble being the biggest of all, and bond vigilantes are approaching. 🙁

Sometimes I feel like Cassandra stuck inside of Mobile with the Memphis blues again; but unlike Cassandra, I am not alone:

http://market-ticker.org/akcs-www?post=184997

The flawed ethics law was changed after Palin’s term. Would that change have occurred had Palin remained in office? I think not.

As long as she remained in office, recalcitrant Democrats allied with establishment Republicans would have continued with the existing law so they could continue to harass her. Remember, it was those same Democrats and establishment Republicans who wrote the clause that allowed the state to reimburse state legislators for legal costs but not the governor. As long as Sarah Palin remained Governor, they would not have changed that law. So by resigning, Sarah Palin removed herself as an obstable to reform by “depersonalizing” the issue.

Afaik she resigned without trying to rectify that law, especially its unintended consequences. Similarly, Romney did not seek reelection, thereby declining to oversee the implementation of his health care plan. I disapprove.

2. The Republicans that come to my mind are, in alphabetical order, Daniels, Pawlenty and Johnson. (Cain? VP or Secretary of Commerce.) Despite the ahem less than stellar records of the three Texan Presidents I’ve seen, it’s increasingly hard to leave out Perry. There’s also a promising contingent that isn’t ready for prime time but that, like Palin, could be considered if things get so bad that the normal rules don’t apply.

You are right, Palin has become an icon. However, unlike Obama, who is also an icon, Palin is a person of substance. As I understand it, her resignation of the governor’s office was prompted by 2 issues: 1.) She felt her legal problems (which were left wing harassment) were distracting her from performing her duties. 2.) She saw an opportunity to make big bucks for her family and carve out a niche as an outside the box leader of public opinion. She definitely succeeded at #2.

IMO we don’t need a ‘policy wonk’ or a petulant narcissist or a member of the entrenched GOP establishment to take on Obama. We need a straight shooter, with real world experience, who can arouse 70% of the ‘independent’ voters to go to the polls and join us in ousting BHO and lead the ticket with coattails that give the GOP a senate majority.

Personally I like a Cain/West ticket. The MSM and run of the mill progressives will go epileptic if Cain debates Obama and West debates Biden. That would be tag team wrestling at its finest. 😉

I’ll go along with that.

Rubio…could mature into a formidable political force. Or not. I hope we give him time to prove himself one way or the other before anointing him.

I’ll go along with that too. So far I’m impressed, but (of course) I still have questions.

McCain billed himself as a “Maverick”. Although I have my doubts about the validity of that claim, I presume he chose Palin because she had the same label. For better or worse, she is truly the maverick that McCain purports to be. By that I mean that she will always hunt as a lone wolf. She may lead a pack, but she will never blend with one.

Rubio is insulated in a couple of ways. First, his Hispanic name and heritage. Got to be careful not to alienate the Hispanic vote. Secondly, his smooth tongue. Well, there is more than that, but he does deliver his ideas very smoothly. He is very good. He could mature into a formidable political force. Or not. I hope we give him time to prove himself one way or the other before anointing him.