DFW HOYA
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 5,774
|
Post by DFW HOYA on Jul 5, 2009 20:52:45 GMT -5
She reminds me so much of Jessie Ventura. Great TV presence at the beginning of a fast rise, but they had no ability to last on the big stage. Have to disagree-- Jim Janos aka Jesse Ventura is a lot more than a TV presence. He was a Navy SEAL, he made his money in wrestling until he tried to unionize the industry and discuss the emerging steroids issue and got tossed as a result, and ran on a reform agenda that failed in large part because of the kind of legislative gridlock that California is facing right now. Yes, some of his ideas are a little eccentric (in a Ross Perot kind of way) but like Perot he takes political issues very seriously even if you don't agree with him. I think that's in alrge part a by-product of his military background. Sarah Palin became the worst thing a politican can become, a punch line. If Tina Fey ground her up like Phil Hartman parodied Admiral Stockdale a generation ago, that would be one thing, but the comparisons end there. Stockdale was a parody because he was old, not because of who he was, one of the nation's most decorated military officers. As Dennis Miller once said, "Now I know he became a buzzword in this culture for doddering old man, but let’s look at the record, folks. The guy was the first guy in and the last guy out of Vietnam, a war that many Americans, including our present President, did not want to dirty their hands with.... He teaches philosophy at Stanford University, he’s a brilliant, sensitive, courageous man. And yet he committed the one unpardonable sin in our culture: he was bad on television." Sarah Palin never served eight years as a POW as Stockdale and McCain did, never won the Medal of Honor as Stockdale did and sure won't be teaching at Stanford anytime soon. But she became a punchline all the same. A politican that can't name a newspaper or magazine spoke volumes abvout the lack of due diligence the McCain campaign put into what was a "swing for the fences" strategy. They swung and got a pop fly.
|
|
The Stig
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 2,844
|
Post by The Stig on Jul 5, 2009 21:19:47 GMT -5
Tina Fey may have made Palin a punch line, but Palin deserves at least an assist on that one. A lot of Fey's most damaging stuff came when she quoted Palin verbatim.
|
|
TC
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 9,457
|
Post by TC on Jul 5, 2009 21:49:02 GMT -5
My guess is she started in media and will end up there. And honestly, she should do that. So hopefully she'll mosey on over to some part of the dial or cable listings for people who like her stance on the issues. I can't see that. I can see her running for President. I can see her running for Senate although at this point I think Murkowski would wipe the floor with her. I cannot for the life of me see her doing an hour long issues show a la Mike Huckabee or Rachel Maddow or trying to be a pundit. The one other situation I could see - daytime Fox News show, Sarah Palin as white Oprah.
|
|
|
Post by strummer8526 on Jul 5, 2009 21:49:20 GMT -5
I think this board says it all about Palin's appeal (or lack thereof). We're generally somewhat evenly split on most things. Maybe there's a bit of a left leaning. A few hold down the FAR right (Ed and Elvado). There may be a few more who are equivalently left. A lot in the middle, one way or the other. But generally, any issue that comes up gets a broad range of opinions.
On this one, it's looking as close to unanimous as I can remember ever seeing on the board.
|
|
hoya95
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 1,445
|
Post by hoya95 on Jul 5, 2009 22:24:13 GMT -5
She reminds me so much of Jessie Ventura. Great TV presence at the beginning of a fast rise, but they had no ability to last on the big stage. Have to disagree-- Jim Janos aka Jesse Ventura is a lot more than a TV presence. He was a Navy SEAL, he made his money in wrestling until he tried to unionize the industry and discuss the emerging steroids issue and got tossed as a result, and ran on a reform agenda that failed in large part because of the kind of legislative gridlock that California is facing right now. Yes, some of his ideas are a little eccentric (in a Ross Perot kind of way) but like Perot he takes political issues very seriously even if you don't agree with him. I think that's in alrge part a by-product of his military background. Sarah Palin became the worst thing a politican can become, a punch line. If Tina Fey ground her up like Phil Hartman parodied Admiral Stockdale a generation ago, that would be one thing, but the comparisons end there. Stockdale was a parody because he was old, not because of who he was, one of the nation's most decorated military officers. As Dennis Miller once said, "Now I know he became a buzzword in this culture for doddering old man, but let’s look at the record, folks. The guy was the first guy in and the last guy out of Vietnam, a war that many Americans, including our present President, did not want to dirty their hands with.... He teaches philosophy at Stanford University, he’s a brilliant, sensitive, courageous man. And yet he committed the one unpardonable sin in our culture: he was bad on television." Sarah Palin never served eight years as a POW as Stockdale and McCain did, never won the Medal of Honor as Stockdale did and sure won't be teaching at Stanford anytime soon. But she became a punchline all the same. A politican that can't name a newspaper or magazine spoke volumes abvout the lack of due diligence the McCain campaign put into what was a "swing for the fences" strategy. They swung and got a pop fly. Not comparing their backgrounds or abilities on substantive issues. And I really liked Jesse and was impressed by his performance in the debates before he won. I thought he had a chance to last. But he got into a lot of nit-picky fights with the Minnesota press, seemed pretty thin-skinned and frustrated as governor, and basically flamed out as a politican. The low point was some really unfortunate 9/11 conspiracy stuff. It is really hard to come from nowhere and ride a wave into national politics and stay there. The business is incredibly nasty, and you've got to put in a ton of work both substantively and in the process. Unless she really, really wants to dig in, Sarah Palin's 15 minutes as a major elected figure are over. (There is always the screaming head business, but that's a totally different story.)
|
|
EasyEd
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 7,272
|
Post by EasyEd on Jul 6, 2009 10:30:33 GMT -5
I think this board says it all about Palin's appeal (or lack thereof). We're generally somewhat evenly split on most things. Maybe there's a bit of a left leaning. A few hold down the FAR right (Ed and Elvado). There may be a few more who are equivalently left. A lot in the middle, one way or the other. But generally, any issue that comes up gets a broad range of opinions. On this one, it's looking as close to unanimous as I can remember ever seeing on the board. Strummer, anyone who thinks this board is pretty evenly split politically hasn't been on my side of the issues. It's overwhelmingly liberal, at least in terms of those who are not afraid to post. As for Sarah Palin's future, I repeat that I think she will be a voice for conservatism and for the Republican party in the future. I acknowledge her speech was a bit disjointed, probably because she didn't use a prepared speech but chose to talk from a few notes. I do not know what path she will take to become a voice but I will offer the possibility she will travel the country giving speeches and will appear in support of Republican candidates. Because the media is so obsessed with her, her speeches will receive publicity, mostly negative, but they will resonate with conservatives. She will draw large crowds. The speeches will give a vision of conservative rule and will concentrate on the outlandish deficit spending of the current administration, on small government, on national defense, and on real energy independence. She does not have to run for office to have a strong impact on the issues of the day. So many of you seem not to understand the appeal Sarah Palin has to conservatives. She shares their values and is usually very good at articulating them. She has an enormous personal appeal to conservatives. As I said earlier I did not think she was qualified to be Vice President but she is smart enough to learn and to articulate her positions on the issues.
|
|
Elvado
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,080
|
Post by Elvado on Jul 6, 2009 10:42:38 GMT -5
At least one of the reasons governor palin's decision to step down and stop collecting a check she would not be earning as a perpetual candidate is because it flies directly in the face of the course laid out by others like Obama, Clinton, Mccain, etc. The last politician I remember stepping down to run was Dole, other than instances where it is compelled by City Charter like Philly.
|
|
The Stig
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 2,844
|
Post by The Stig on Jul 6, 2009 10:54:13 GMT -5
At least one of the reasons governor palin's decision to step down and stop collecting a check she would not be earning as a perpetual candidate is because it flies directly in the face of the course laid out by others like Obama, Clinton, Mccain, etc. The last politician I remember stepping down to run was Dole, other than instances where it is compelled by City Charter like Philly. Then why did she step down now, when she's not running for anything? Why didn't she step down when she was actually a candidate? Was she earning her paycheck as Governor of Alaska when she was down in the Lower 48 campaigning for the VP job? In general I actually agree with you - candidates should resign from the offices they hold when they start all-consuming campaigns for higher office. But don't hold Palin up as an example of that ideal, because she didn't do it when she was running for VP.
|
|
Elvado
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,080
|
Post by Elvado on Jul 6, 2009 10:59:14 GMT -5
You and I fundamentally agree, but let's at least acknowledge that her run was a bit shorter at 4 months than was the 18 months or so our current President served as Senator in absentia. Same for Mccain and Hillary. I don't know her plans, but if she believes she would not be serving the peopleof Alaska and chose to resign, she should not be pilloried for it. Then again, maybe she's running away form the heat. Only time will tell.
|
|
theexorcist
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 3,506
|
Post by theexorcist on Jul 6, 2009 11:23:37 GMT -5
I think this board says it all about Palin's appeal (or lack thereof). We're generally somewhat evenly split on most things. Maybe there's a bit of a left leaning. A few hold down the FAR right (Ed and Elvado). There may be a few more who are equivalently left. A lot in the middle, one way or the other. But generally, any issue that comes up gets a broad range of opinions. On this one, it's looking as close to unanimous as I can remember ever seeing on the board. Strummer, anyone who thinks this board is pretty evenly split politically hasn't been on my side of the issues. It's overwhelmingly liberal, at least in terms of those who are not afraid to post. As for Sarah Palin's future, I repeat that I think she will be a voice for conservatism and for the Republican party in the future. I acknowledge her speech was a bit disjointed, probably because she didn't use a prepared speech but chose to talk from a few notes. I do not know what path she will take to become a voice but I will offer the possibility she will travel the country giving speeches and will appear in support of Republican candidates. Because the media is so obsessed with her, her speeches will receive publicity, mostly negative, but they will resonate with conservatives. She will draw large crowds. The speeches will give a vision of conservative rule and will concentrate on the outlandish deficit spending of the current administration, on small government, on national defense, and on real energy independence. She does not have to run for office to have a strong impact on the issues of the day. So many of you seem not to understand the appeal Sarah Palin has to conservatives. She shares their values and is usually very good at articulating them. She has an enormous personal appeal to conservatives. As I said earlier I did not think she was qualified to be Vice President but she is smart enough to learn and to articulate her positions on the issues. On point one, the board tends libertarian, but it does have a fair number of people who oppose Obama. Easyed, I don't think it's a stretch to say that a) you're further on the right spectrum than most, and b) people who are not as far right as you but are not moderates aren't liberals. I think she'll run. If she does, she does it from a position of weakness, since she didn't a) stay governor or b) make "I want to run for president" one of her reasons for stepping down.
|
|
SFHoya99
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 17,781
|
Post by SFHoya99 on Jul 6, 2009 11:25:38 GMT -5
There's not a lot of cultural or religious conservatives (who post) on this board.
There's a lot of libertarian-style conservatives.
|
|
Boz
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
123 Fireballs!
Posts: 10,355
|
Post by Boz on Jul 6, 2009 12:15:31 GMT -5
I think the game has changed a little bit and Sarah Palin is either prescient or she is going to get out of that game altogether.
Let me preface this by saying I am not defending this decision. I think she should have served out her term. I am skeptical of any legal reasons/rumors about why she may need to leave, mainly because it's pretty well documented that everything that's been filed against her to date was bogus. Family or money reasons? OK, I could believe that, but I don't really think those were the reasons. If it was family, she's going to contradict that soon enough if she wants to remain a public figure. If it was money, well, I guess I could buy that, but it seems to me there are a lot of people out there who are willing to raise money for Sarah Palin.
Having said all of that, I think she got out because she wants to be a player. Maybe run for President of course, but even if not, then to be a Republican star. If Sarah Palin wants to do those things, serving as governor of Alaska doesn't really offer her any advantages. It's not going to help her expand her base at all. On the other hand, if she is traveling around the country over the next 18 months, campaigning for Republicans (and yes, crafting more substantive policy positions), giving speeches, raising money, etc., she gives herself -- excuse me: she has the opportunity to give herself -- a very big advantage.
Those who think she is a "punchline," may ask, "Who would want Sarah Palin campaigning for them?" To this I would point you to ed's comments that you really don't understand her appeal at all. She may be a punchline on the coasts, but she is far from that in many parts of America, even blue parts. If you think there aren't Republicans all over the country, especially in the South and Midwest, who wouldn't love to have her working for them, you're crazy.
She can help raise money for Republicans, she can draw crowds to their events, she can become a star in the party. Yes, she needs to become more serious, absolutely. But this is not a dumb or unsavvy woman; if she sets her mind to it, you should probably believe that she can do it.
I think we can also thank Barack Obama for the way the game has changed a little bit too. Now, Obama is much more eloquent and detailed when it comes to policy positions (at least he was when he was a candidate -- and when he has a teleprompter). People took him more seriously when he came onto the national stage initially, but if you remember, they didn't take him ALL that more seriously. Yes, people said he would be a rising star in the party, but anyone who tells you that they thought Obama could be President in 2009 when he was introduced to America in 2004 is lying through their teeth. Nobody believed that. They all said he had to take some time to have some real accomplishments first.
Someone want to remind me what Barack Obama's accomplishments in the Senate were?
Barack Obama's Senate career was about running for President and running for President only, and we all know it. And guess what? He pulled it off. Was his national office REALLY that much of an advantage for him? I submit that it only was because he didn't really have a lot behind that. With Palin, she won't be running from a position of holding office, but I really don't think, today, that this is that much of a disadvantage, if any.
You may look at Sarah Palin now and not take her seriously, and in some respects that's with good reason. Furthermore, I know there are some who will NEVER take her seriously. But if you don't think that if she wants to (again, we're not 100% certain that this is what's going on here, but we all think it is), she can make herself into a serious candidate, you are not only underestimating her, you are neglecting all recent history that says otherwise.
Kathleen Parker and Peggy Noonan and people who are calling for Republicans to be "Democrat Lite" might hate it, but most actual conservatives love her, so she's not going anywhere if she decides that she wants to be a player.
You may cheer at that today as a liberal, and who knows, I could be completely wrong and you'd be right to cheer. If Sarah Palin just wants to continue to be the hokey, down-home MILF, then yeah, you'd be right to cheer. But if she wants to take that persona, combined with her conservative values and some real policy advocacy -- the big challenge of course --, I think it would be a mistake to laugh her off as a punchline. (Keep in mind, she is actually winning more than she's losing these days when people take her on; hell, it may have taken a while, but she even got NOW on her side in the most recent Letterman kerfuffle).
As with all in life, time will tell.
|
|
DFW HOYA
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 5,774
|
Post by DFW HOYA on Jul 6, 2009 12:28:42 GMT -5
There's not a lot of cultural or religious conservatives (who post) on this board. There's a lot of libertarian-style conservatives. Is that a function of student demographics? For a school which applauds its diversity, GU does not appear to attract comparable percentages of conservative Protestants and/or evangelicals relative to the population at large and seem less receptive to groups that would hold a Bible study in Red Square vs. those pleading for social justice in Darfur. A recent example: chronicle.com/news/article/902/georgetown-u-bans-outside-protestant-groups-from-campus
|
|
TC
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 9,457
|
Post by TC on Jul 6, 2009 12:29:31 GMT -5
(Keep in mind, she is actually winning more than she's losing these days when people take her on; hell, it may have taken a while, but she even got NOW on her side in the most recent Letterman kerfuffle). Really? We're counting attacking David Letterman as a pedophile in a disingenuous smear as a "win"? Getting wrapped up in that argument at all was a loss. I'd argue that the game has changed, mostly because of the economy. State budgets have to be slashed and states need to find new revenue sources, which mean higher taxes. Raising taxes is an inconvenient position to have to take, and would have put her behind Romney, Giuliani, and Huckabee - none of whom currently hold office or have to do that.
|
|
Boz
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
123 Fireballs!
Posts: 10,355
|
Post by Boz on Jul 6, 2009 12:32:01 GMT -5
Yes, really. Sarah Palin, a die-hard conservative, got the National Organization for Women, a group which detests her, to come out with a statement ostensibly supporting her.
Yes, I would call that a win.
When she fights back, yes, she is going to win more than she loses. I can pretty much guarantee that.
But, since I know you're probably one of the ones who will never take her seriously no matter what, I won't worry about convincing you of that.
(And, as I said, maybe you will be right never to, but if she does get serious, she will be able to convince a lot of people not named TC)
|
|
TC
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 9,457
|
Post by TC on Jul 6, 2009 12:41:31 GMT -5
Really? Sarah Palin, a die-hard conservative, got the National Organization for Women, a group which detests her, to come out with a statement ostensibly supporting her. What exactly does that get her? The downside is that a ton of other people saw through her ridiculous smears because the joke was about Bristol, not whatever daughter she was saying it was about, and that she frames herself as a pop-culture figure, not a figure in the world of politics.
|
|
theexorcist
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 3,506
|
Post by theexorcist on Jul 6, 2009 12:53:04 GMT -5
There's not a lot of cultural or religious conservatives (who post) on this board. There's a lot of libertarian-style conservatives. Is that a function of student demographics? For a school which applauds its diversity, GU does not appear to attract comparable percentages of conservative Protestants and/or evangelicals relative to the population at large and seem less receptive to groups that would hold a Bible study in Red Square vs. those pleading for social justice in Darfur. A recent example: chronicle.com/news/article/902/georgetown-u-bans-outside-protestant-groups-from-campusOooh - good one. This is probably worth its own thread. My thoughts: 1. Georgetown's power recruiting base is in California, the mid-Atlantic, and New England. None of these places are evangelical hotbeds. 2. Conservative Protestants and evangelicals, until recently at least, have kind of seen government as something which is intrininsically corrupt. Rather than joining it to save it (the exception has been Patrick Henry College), the preference has been to seek other paths to spread the word. If I were an evangelical, I'd be wary of going to a school, regardless of religous denomination, who consistently turns out foreign service officers and people who work for the Peace Corps as opposed to church missions. That's not to say that Georgetown won't get some evangelicals, but I would expect that many would self-select out. 3. The banning of certain student religous groups was discussed a while ago on this board. I don't think that it's an inherent GU hostility but more of an internal Christian issue (as opposed to Catholic groups, which essentially go through the St. Thomas More Society and have very similar beliefs, non-Catholic Christians have a much greater diversity of belief and are thus much more difficult to break out).
|
|
Boz
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
123 Fireballs!
Posts: 10,355
|
Post by Boz on Jul 6, 2009 13:03:06 GMT -5
Really? Sarah Palin, a die-hard conservative, got the National Organization for Women, a group which detests her, to come out with a statement ostensibly supporting her. What exactly does that get her? The downside is that a ton of other people saw through her ridiculous smears because the joke was about Bristol, not whatever daughter she was saying it was about, and that she frames herself as a pop-culture figure, not a figure in the world of politics. How we, as a culture, treat women -- and young women -- is not a political issue? It sure is in the America I live in. And in the world at large. And I really can't believe you are calling her smears "ridiculous" on this particular issue (and calling them "smears" at that). That's pretty nuts. This was an absolute no-brainer win for Palin. Virtually everyone, including every liberal talking head on air, save Keith Olbermann and maybe Jon Stewart, was out there saying she was right and it didn't matter which daughter the jokes were about. Honestly, with all due respect, if you can't even acknowledge that, then you're just one of those who's going to be slamming her no matter what she's talking about. So, like I said, you're not really in any kind of demo that she'd be trying to speak to.
|
|
TC
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 9,457
|
Post by TC on Jul 6, 2009 13:15:27 GMT -5
And I really can't believe you are calling her smears "ridiculous" on this particular issue (and calling them "smears" at that). That's pretty nuts. Boz, seriously, come back to earth man. He made a joke about Bristol Palin. You want to defend your daughter in a sincere way, no one on earth is going to fault you for that. She departed reality, gave the impression he made fun of one of her underage-non-public-figure daughters, and framed it as "David Letterman is a pedophile". Maybe which daughter the joke is about doesn't matter to her base, because whether she's Governor or not doesn't even matter to them. But it matters to most people.
|
|
EasyEd
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 7,272
|
Post by EasyEd on Jul 6, 2009 13:42:48 GMT -5
Which daughter was with her at Yankee Stadium?
|
|