Palin’s 1st Knife In The Back

Trackbacks

1. Webloggin » Waging Civil War on the GOP says:

   November 6, 2008 at 1:44 pm

   [...] Palin’s 1st Knife In The Back : Ft. Hard Knox [...]

   Reply

Comments

1. Nate says:

   November 7, 2008 at 12:12 am

   Last night I came across David Frum’s typicle ltired lamentation about the Republicans’ need to purge the party of their social conservative base.

   Until I read his backhanded comment about Sarah Palin having no place in the Republican party’s national future I was merely bored. Then I became disgusted Today when it seemed to become apparant that the nomination of Palin was nothing more than a bone to consersatives in fly over country (i.e us hicks and rednecks) I became angry. When I read about how McCain and his staffers really felt about Palin I became incensed.

   It is not that I am convinced that Sarah is the savior of the conservative movement. I am not convinced that she is not either. She certainly has the right conservative instincts, the right background, and the charisma. She was thrown into the fire, forced to pretend to adopt views contrary to her philosophical instincts, and subjected to the most vicious attacks from elitists on both sides of the political spectrum.

   Of course she wouldn’t be versed on obscure geographical facts or silly arguments over the meaning of the Bus Doctrines defined in our liberal ivory towers. Presidential candidates who are governers (and even senators) have many months to acquaint themselves with enough trivial facts and inane soundbites to pretend that they are versed in foreign policy. However, unless they have had executive experience in an administration with top secret clearances they really have nothing more than their own philosophical approach to the application of power, force, and diplomacy in U.S. foreign policy. Palin seemed to have the mettle and the realistic world view to have easily moved into a strong leadership role and her instincts certainly would keep us more safe than Obama’s (whose naivity and utopian worldview is reflected by my Freshman Foreign Policy 101 class professor).

   Palin has a lot to prove certainly. It will be interesting to see how her national domestic and foreign policy views grow as she is untethered from McCain’s left of center mush. I think her populism was much more a product of McCain’s views than her natural Alaskan instincts.

   I hope that I am correct that the following Palin misgiving are mere myths.

   1) Her standing in the Republican party is only because of hard core anti-abortion views.

   Th]is one is just plain silly. Palin is certainly a religious evangelical. However she has never ran any campaign overtly pushing such issues. She has been successful because of her fearless leadership qualities, anti-corruption stances, fiscal responsibility, disarming charisma, and her down to earh common sense. Of course she is not going to back down on her pro-life stances but they don’t define her appeal either.

   2) Sarah Palin is a populist in economic theory.

   The Jury is still out on this one. The most damning piece of evidence against her was her treatment of the oil companies and her seeming preference for windfall taxes. I believe that this view of Palin is misguided.

   Palin comes from an energy producing state with an overwhelming amount of public land. Conservatives in the West almost uniformly are in line with Sarah on this issue.

   We view it in the context of a shared (as in by the individual state) resource that is being removed permanenty from the state with some impact on our lands. While enthusiaticly supporting and pushing for the energy production,it is almost universal accepted that royalties are resource payments rather than a windfall tax.

   Of course, even at the federal level substantial royalties are taken by the federal government. However, these royalties are in line with what occurs on private land and every oil producing country. Recieving compensation for extracted resources is a far cry from a profits tax. I don’t have any reason to believe that Palin views this concept differently than any other western politician.

   Time will tell but I feel very comfortable with Palin on taxes and small government when not saddled with McCain’s democrat lite views on the role of government.

   3) Palin is out of her league on the National level and cost McCain votes by scaring moderate voters.

   It is shocking how many of the “conservative” establishment continue to espouse this view. Any credible analysis would have to conclude that Palin’s rallying of the base is the only reason the Republicans retained 43 senators and made the battlegrounds at least competitive.

   Perhaps she cost the party some votes in blue states that bought into the MSM’s personal assault on Palin aided and abetted by the stuffy arrogant Republican elite who have once again demonstrated their contempt for people like me.

   I believe that is it is unquestionable that Palin represents the only real conservative leader that Republicans can rally around right now. If you can point me to another I would be glad to hear it because I can’t think of one.

   As Sarah’s own philosophical views about the proper roles of the federal government will be be solidified in the next couple of years and we will know if she is the 2012 horse to back. I suspect she will come through as a powerful conservative force to be reckoned with. I hope I am right because I see no one else on the horizon that will pick up the pieces of the country left after the Obama Administration and forge them into a renewed American Dream.

   But I digress, Now to the reason I am incensed. I am middle America. Grew up on a ranch, went to a public University, in Northern Utah, graduated from a top 30 law school in the Mountain West (yes there are two of them- almost went to Idaho Palin’s alma mater) for law school before being accepted at BYU. I worked as a government lawyer for 3 years before opening my own solo firm. I have seen the inefficiencies and deficiencies of government and I have experienced the incomphrehensible burden of regulation and taxes imposed on a new small business trying to make it in America. I spent two years in New York City working as a missionary in slums and ghettos and have seen the devastating effect of the welfare state on hope and the human spirit.

   I chose to struggle to build a practice in a rural area rather than take the easy way out in the City. My family and friends are farmers, ranchers oil field and factory workers, teachers and cops. My idea of a vacation is a week long elk hunt far back in Wyoming’s wild country with my father in law with a high school education who built a small oil construction business from scratch and turned it into a very successful business with his dedication to hard work, honesty, and small town values. (As a matter of course I would trust this former oil-field roughneck on matters of political philosophy or life decision then I would ever any of the Peggy Noonan’s and David Frum’s of the World.)

   That is me, and those like my father in law and parents are the backbone of the remnants of Freedom, opportunity, and the American Dream. That is what I see in Sarah Palin and don’t see in the Washington elite Republicans who have run are party so amock for the past 14 years that they have drug my version of America into the ground by associating it with your party.

   David, take your Republican Party and go with it. You will find yourself in the lonely wildernes rejected by your northeast moderates who prefer the real thing to Democrat lite. As for me I’ll glady stand behind my man (even if she is a woman).

   Reply
2. Jenn Sierra says:

   November 7, 2008 at 12:44 am

   You’ve made some very good points, Nate…Thank you for sharing.

   I have always had serious doubts that McCain intended to win this election. Sarah was the one bright spot in this whole ugly mess, and the jackals are salivating over the thought of ripping her to shreds. But they can’t. Not really. She’s not of their world.

   Reply
3. Stephen Kruiser says:

   November 7, 2008 at 3:35 am

   Nate-Good stuff. The people I have talked to or interacted with online who loath Sarah Palin like to pretend that those of us who supported her all did so for blind, emotional reasons. I read reasoned responses like yours and wish I could pass them along (everyone already thinks I’m a hothead, rightly so) to some people but I know that most of them don’t make room for facts that run counter to convenient stereotypes.

   Reply
4. Orlando says:

   November 7, 2008 at 10:51 am

   What is interesting is the amount of energy that is spent bashing Sarah Palin on YouTube and the main stream media. Why? They know McCain was not a threat. He is not a true Conservative but Palin is. Have you noticed the unleashing of negativity? They want to squash Conservatives as much as possible…even after the election.

   Reply
5. Stephen Kruiser says:

   November 7, 2008 at 12:35 pm

   My thoughts exactly, Orlando. If she’s such an incompetent, inconsequential rube why talk about her all the time.

   They know that we’re wandering through the wilderness with a hunter who can get us out. (Hey-there’s my next blog idea…)

   Reply
6. Debbie says:

   November 7, 2008 at 7:14 pm

   This is on purpose, to make Palin look bad so she will not run in 1012

   Reply
7. Ross Roberts says:

   November 9, 2008 at 3:11 pm

   Sarah Palin showing up to help John McCain when she did, might have saved Republican incumbent seats in Congress.

   Reply
8. Tyler M says:

   November 9, 2008 at 8:03 pm

   Who has the most to lose if Palin gains in popularity?

   Well it’s not Mitt Romney. Romney has to worry more about Bobby Jindal who will attract the same base as Romney. The Romney & Jindal bases are those who are seeking after an extremely competent chief executive who has a strong resume in turning around things. Both Mitt & Bobby are also social conservatives. So, it would make more sense for Romney and his supporters to be afraid of Bobby Jindal.

   Sarah Palin is also a conservative governor but her base of support is evangelical Christians. Which other candidate this year wanted to be the “CHRISTIAN LEADER?” Oh, that’s right! Mike Huckabee.

   Huckabee has the most to lose with the rise of Sarah Palin. Huckabee is also one of the most extreme cases of self promoting, devious politicians I have ever seen. Huckabee’s campaign Chair just happened to be Chip Saltsman who then went to work at the top of the McCain camp. He could easily be one of the unnamed McCain campaign sources attacking Palin. Saltsman is also now trying to become head of the RNC. I would think that Saltsman wants his boy Huckabee to be the next nominee so that Saltsman can get repaid big time.
   So, why not attack Sarah Palin on one hand while floating the rumor that it was Romney’s camp doing the attacking? Huckabee could be trying to kill two birds with one stone here. Huckabee proved to be a big FAT (before his liposuction) liar throughout the campaign. Huckabee has attacked the Club for Growth as the Club for Greed & has attacked people who support strong border enforcement as racists. Huckabee has attacked everybody who got in his way throughout his career. He is an immature liberal idiot who thinks he’s a Republican only because he opposes abortion.

   I think that it is pro-Huckabee people who are floating the anti-Palin rumors. McCain people just make McCain look dumb for having chosen Palin if they attack her for not being ready. But Huckabee has the most to gain in attacking Governor Palin. Huckabee’s also the reason why Romney didn’t win the nomination with his anti-Mormon smears. He will do whatever it takes to take out his opponents. He even went far enough to push hard against Mitt being put on the Republican Ticket out of jealousy. I hate Huck! He’s the lowest form of life on the planet.

   Reply