04 July 2009

Happy second term, President Obama

Sarah Palin is considered by most to be a serious contender for the Republican presidential nomination in 2012.

This should make Republicans in the United States decidedly uneasy. 

Palin’s departure/resignation comments are, in places,  vague and in other places confused.  Notice they are not confusing;  it should be clear to anyone listening that Palin was blabbering incoherent nonsense.  She switches with apparent easy between referring to herself in the singular to referring to herself in the plural, for example. She talks of the need to do some thing – never clearly stated -  in politics from outside politics, as if that was possible.   

Palin proved to be an appalling choice as vice-president, worse than the spelling champion chosen by Bush I.  She is, as John Cleese has described her, a good actor.  A good parrot.  She learns lines and repeats them.  She does not think.

Cleese should know:  he’s worked with an intelligent, funny Palin and a dead parrot in the same sketch.

When Palin had handlers during the presidential campaign she looked better.  She looked better because she had campaign professionals feeding her lines and dressing.  Palin may have complained but it worked.

In Alaska on Friday, Palin on her own, without handlers, massagers and healers, was closer to what American would get in Palin the presidential candidate.

If Sarah Palin – parodied by a comedian who merely copied the politician  without changing a thing -  is a presidential hopeful because she appeals strongly to the party’s voter base, Republicans might wish to do some serious repairs to the foundation of their party.

When they look beyond Palin, they should get ever more concerned.

Her rival is Mitt Romney, another insubstantial lump of plastic.  Both Romney and Palin are on the campaign trail already. The recent election is barely eight months over and already 2012 candidates are working the stump.

That alone should tell much about the prospective candidates.

Sarah Palin’s departure from gubernatoral politic is brilliant, according to Mary Matalin.  Clearly, Matalin is willing to take one for the team, in this case a hit to her credibility.  She is always on message and  always on point which is more than could be said of Palin.

Matalin and her fellow strategists are too sharp not to know the party is in big trouble.  Once the holiday weekend  - and a few heads – starts to clear.  Maybe Matalin and her colleagues should take a look at where their party is going.

For the heights of political success to Sarah Palin, Greatest Hope in a mere two decades.

That should send chills up anyone’s spine.

Oh.

And by the way.

Obama’s second term is guaranteed.  Congrats Mr. President.

And the way things are looking, Biden’s got a serious shot at 2016.  Back to back to back Democrat presidents.

Everyone can thank the likes of Sarah Palin.

-srbp-

7 comments:

towniebastard said...

All very true, except that Biden in 2016. He's already stated he won't run for president. I think in 2016 he would be in his mid-70s.

Edward G. Hollett said...

Fargin' nit-pickin' negative blogger!

;-)

The party is in such a state that 70-odd year old Biden who said he wouldn't be running in 2016 could change his mind, run and have a shot at it.

Jason Hickman said...

I disagree with this:

Her rival is Mitt Romney, another insubstantial lump of plastic.

One doesn't have to be a Romney supporter, assuming that one is even entitled to vote for/against him, to see that he's more than an "insubstantial lump of plastic".

Politically, he was elected as a Republican governor in Massachusetts, which is quite a feat on its own. He's also had a successful business careeer and did a very good job as CEO of the '02 Olympics Org. Committee (which is when I first heard tell of him, long before he started running for president), turning it from a money-loser of near-Montreal-in-1976 levels.

I'm not trying to turn you into a Republican (now *that* would be a fun project...) and I'm not saying that Romney could necessarily beat Obama, even if he wins the R nomination. But saying he's just as "light" as Palin is, in turn, a little heavy on the snark and a little light on the substance. Just my $0.02.

Edward G. Hollett said...

Through the entire primary season, I saw nothing in Romney that suggested he had the usual gravitas one finds in successful presidential candidates. (Leave Bush II out of it)

He was a former governor, a venture capitalist and all that but nothing that suggested he had the stuff to go from that tier up to the next one.

The lump of plastic reference was to my own impression that he was shifting images of himself (and positions) during the campaign to appeal to segments of the voting population. He seemed packaged in the worst possible sense of the word and hence insubstantial.

Your mileage may vary.

For the most part, the Republican primaries were characterised by the sort of second tier and fringe candidates one used to associate with the Democratic Party.

Romney seems to me nothing more than a latter day Mike Dukakis with more personal wealth and a better hair style.

But Fred Thompson?

Ron Paul?

Mike Hukabee?

Holy crap. That was the best the Republican Party could offer?

Even McCain, who was my own choice the last time he ran, turned out to be pretty weak-assed.

His campaign was characterised by bizarre turns, including the campaign halt and the selection of Palin.

Again, the whole Republican philosophy seemed built around constructing a set of candidates and images of the candidates based on how it would appeal to certain voter segments.

It's all very calculated, sterile, analytical and has the ring of contrivance around it.

Nothing was more contrived than the stuffing Sarah Palin on the vice-presidential ticket. She even tops Dan Quayle as head-scratcher of a choice to fill the second spot.

You may not like it that I lumped Mitt in with Palin, but look at the rest of the field.

Then look at the Republican presidential candidates before Bush II. (If you add Bush II you just add another second rater to the mix and that just lowers the bar.)

If you can tell me that Mitt matches Bush I, then we'll just have to agree to disagree.

When I look at the Republicans I see a party in need of a serious shake-up. They got creamed last November and they will likely get creamed again soon if they don't figure out that more of the same isn't really an option.

A Big Black NL K9 with 2 Tails said...

Sarah should move to Minnesota...the state bird is a loon.

A Big Black NL K9 with 2 Tails said...

A stand-in columnist (Gail Collins) at the NYTimes opened with this silly season holiday zinger on Friday: "Truly, Sarah Palin has come a long way. When she ran for vice president, she frequently became disjointed and garbled when she departed from her prepared remarks. Now the prepared remarks are incoherent, too."

A Big Black NL K9 with 2 Tails said...

And one last nugget just in case you missed it. Shannyn Moore is an Alaskan resident and Palin irritant as blogger for The Huff Post. Ms. Moore thinks, and I quote: "...Sarah Palin's political ambition combined with her intellect is like putting a jet engine on a golf cart; lots of horse power and no steering". That was posted on Friday and it's still feels beautiful.