(HT: Jennifer Rubin at Contentions)
Sullivan writes:

It was the most electrifying speech I have heard from a leader of the GOP since Reagan.

She can electrify a crowd. She has the kind of charisma that appeals to the sub-rational. and she has crafted a Peronist identity – utterly fraudulent, of course – that is political dynamite in a recession with populism roiling everyone and everything. She is Coughlin with boobs – except with a foreign policy agenda to expand Israel and unite with it in a war against Islam.

Do not under-estimate the appeal of a beautiful, big breasted, divinely chosen warrior-mother as a military leader in a global religious war. (emphasis added)

That’s my Spockian reaction to the comments section of Quin Hilyer’s blog post regarding Sarah Palin’s decision not to attend CPAC this year.  Though Quin’s title might have been provocative, it was a reasonable (I felt) post expressing why Palin made the wrong decision.  Unfortunately, any criticism of Sarah Palin is deemed heresy to a certain portion of her supporters who now seem eager to evict Hilyer out of the conservative movement.  This Pavlovian response is but the mere mirror response of Palin critics whenever someone has the temerity to praise her (See especially the comments of Dennis, who is “disturbed” that anyone has the gall to actually defend Palin.)

Is there anyone left who is capable of rationally discussing the merits or demerits of anything this woman does?  Supporters do themselves no favors by reflexively shouting down anyone who dares utter a single negative comment about her.  Detractors often reveal that they are just as incapable of entertaining other points of view, and do so in ways that reveal their own inability to move beyond the media narrative.

I’m not saying we all have to hang out in some perpetual limbo where we keep an “open mind” (YACK!) about Sarah Palin.  Again, I’m just fascinated that there just seems to be not only no middle ground regarding her, but that she elicits only the most extreme reaction either way.

And for the record, I largely agree with Dr. Beckwith.  I understand that there is a large berth given to the type of sponsor CPAC allows, but it makes sense for Palin and others to distance themselves as much as they can from the fringe element.

(Originally posted on What’s Wrong with the World)

This, just up, from Sarah Palin on her Facebook page (with footnotes too!):

Yesterday President Obama responded to my statement that Democratic health care proposals would lead to rationed care; that the sick, the elderly, and the disabled would suffer the most under such rationing; and that under such a system these “unproductive” members of society could face the prospect of government bureaucrats determining whether they deserve health care.

The President made light of these concerns. He said:

(more…)

It’s about Trig. Always has been.

Make no mistake, Palin’s bombshell announcement today begins the 2012 race. Barring some Andrew Sullivanesque wildest fantasy of a forthcoming scandalous revelation, there is no other way to read this decision.

My initial instinct is to call this move savvy. The announcement itself tacitly takes advantage of not only the news cycle but the reality that people will now talk about her at every Independence Day July picnic. That’s a smarts not usually seen on the Republican side. (more…)

Bombshell: Governor Palin will not seek re-election, and she is resigning effective July 25th.

Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin shocked the political word Friday by announcing that she will step down at the end of the month and transfer power to Lt. Gov. Sean Parnell.

Update: Video of the presser.

On Thursday night Governor Palin admitted that she briefly considered ending her pregnancy with her Down Syndrome child, Trig:

“For a fleeting moment,” she considered having an abortion after learning that her son Trig would have Down syndrome. The experience, she added, “now lets me understand a woman’s, a girl’s temptation to maybe try to make it all go away. . . I had just enough faith to know that my trying to change the circumstances wasn’t any answer,” said Palin, the featured speaker before 3,000 people at a banquet in Evansville.

I’m fairly heartened to hear Governor Palin say these things. To me it adds nuance and complexity to the reality that is motherhood in America today that a strict, political platform presentation of pro-life views cannot. Governor Palin was certainly not ready for the limelight back in September—no one could have expected her to address something like this in the heat of the campaign. And despite my serious misgivings about her, sincerity like this warms me a bit more towards Governor Palin in 2012. Faith and Doubt do in fact work hand-in-hand and that’s something better for the world to see than rhetorical hope and change.

The latest from Gallup:

POLITICO’s poll confirms these numbers.  And to stir the pot, it’s worth noting that just 26% of Americans said that they trusted Sarah Palin “to identify the right solutions to the problems we face as a nation.”  Pelosi fared better than Palin.

I have to admit, I’m no expert on so-called “Troopergate” — I only know what I read in the papers — but from what I have seen, the whole matter reeked of a political inquest. In a move to clear some of Gov. Palin’s name, the independent investigatory panel for the Alaska Personnel Board released its findings today, and has concluded that she violated no ethics laws in terminating Commissioner Walt Monegan. For what it’s worth.

You knew it was coming, didn’t you? She was doing so well, and had such promise. Now, it’s all in shambles.

Hackers have allegedly broken into Sarah Palin’s Yahoo email account and posted their findings on Wikileaks. And, sadly, the woman I had such hopes for appears to have–I hate to post this on a family blog, but sometimes you just have to deal with filth–both disagreed with a talk show host AND has a friend who prayed for her.

Smoking gun? This is a smoldering arsenal, my friends. It’s all over now.

These are the four columns I would recommend to the proverbial man-from-Mars trying if he were trying to understand the dynamics of the presidential race going forward:

* Nick Cohen in Sunday’s Guardian.

*  Michael Knox Beran on NRO last Thursday.

*  Andrew McCarthy on NRO last Thursday.

*  Jonathan Last on First Things last Thursday.

For what it’s worth . . .

An on the money blog post by Jonathan V. Last at First Things:

There are reasonable criticisms that can be made of Sarah Palin, both as governor and a vice presidential selection. Yet little of what we have seen in the last six days has been either reasonable or critical (in the traditional sense of the word). Instead, much of the left and many in the media simply lashed out at Palin, particularly at her family.

And not only the fringiest parts of the political fringe: A writer at the Washington Post attacked Palin for the fact that her seventeen-year-old daughter was going to have a baby. A writer for The Atlantic openly questioned whether or not Palin’s four-month-old baby, who has Down’s Syndrome, was actually hers. The utterly unfounded suggestion was that the baby was Palin’s daughter’s and that the governor had faked her pregnancy. Proof of the baby’s birth was demanded.

(more…)

To sift through the Palin storm on the interweb — the blogs and talking heads and rabid commenters — one would get the feeling that the Palin pick was a political disaster for McCain. Of course, I understand that the interweb is fantasy land peopled by puffed shirts who believe that it is more real than reality. I know that Middle America isn’t an area dominated by Daily Show-watching, Huffington Post-reading douche bags caught up in vindictive politics. But after a week of liberal pounding, I have had only one question: What effect has all the attacks and nattering about Gov. Palin had on the voters? Is she “the worst pick ever” as some armchair geniuses are stating? Is she toast?

Nope.

The Palin pick has also improved perceptions of John McCain. A week ago, just before he introduced his running mate, just 42% of Republicans had a Very Favorable opinion of their party’s nominee. That figure jumped to 54% by this Friday morning. Among unaffiliated voters, favorable opinions of McCain have increased by eleven percentage points in a week—from 54% before the Palin announcement to 65% today.

Fifty-one percent (51%) of all voters now believe that McCain made the right choice when he picked Palin to be his running mate while 32% disagree. By way of comparison, on the night after Biden gave his acceptance speech, 47% said that Obama made the right choice.

Eighty-one percent (81%) of Republicans say that McCain made the right choice while just 69% of Democrats said the same about Obama.

Among unaffiliated voters, 52% said that McCain made the right choice for his running mate and 45% said the same about Obama.

Middle America, I’m sorry I doubted you.

The useless talking-head chitter chatter has gone from a background annoyance to a resonant hum following the surprise nomination of Governor Palin. Citizens such as myself who seek to preserve our sanity by avoiding talking heads and the whine of the ruby-throated North American pundit cannot block out the Left’s chest beating and its crocodile tears for the Governor’s children. Even on this sacred site, the comments inevitably turn to the issue of pregnant teens and leadership. Why this fevered fusillade from the Lunatic Fringe?

As usual, Peggy Noonan has the answer. It’s fear.

Because she jumbles up so many cultural categories, because she is a feminist not in the Yale Gender Studies sense but the How Do I Reload This Thang way, because she is a woman who in style, history, moxie and femininity is exactly like a normal American feminist and not an Abstract Theory feminist; because she wears makeup and heels and eats mooseburgers and is Alaska Tough, as Time magazine put it; because she is conservative, and pro-2nd Amendment and pro-life; and because conservatives can smell this sort of thing — who is really one of them and who is not — and will fight to the death for one of their beleaguered own; because of all of this she is a real and present danger to the American left, and to the Obama candidacy.

She could become a transformative political presence.

So they are going to have to kill her, and kill her quick.

My suspicion is that they will be even more scared tomorrow.

Anderson Cooper asked Barack Obama last night to answer the claim that Sarah Palin has more applicable experience than he does. In response, he completely ignores Palin’s status as governor, and then makes the claim that a campaign counts as executive experience:

AC: Some Republican critics say, you don’t have the experience to handle a situation like this [Hurricane Gustav]. They’ve in fact said that Governor Palin has more executive experience as mayor of a small town and as governor of a big state like Alaska. What’s your response?

BO: Well, you know, my understanding is that, uh, Governor Palin’s town of Wasilly [sic] has, uh, 50 employees, uh, uh, we’ve got 2500, uh, in this campaign. I think their budget is maybe $12 million a year. Uh, uh, we have a budget of about three times that just for the month. Uh, so I think that, uh, our ability to manage large systems, uh, and to, uh, execute, uh, I think has been made clear over the last couple of years. Uh, and certainly, in terms of, uh, the legislation that I’ve passed just dealing with this issue post-Katrina, uh, of how we handle emergency management. The fact that, uh, many of my recommendations were adopted and are being put in place, uh, as we speak indicates to extent to which we can provide the kinds of support and good service that the American people expect.

(Ed Morrissey)

Again, both Senator McCain and Gov. Palin have actual executive experience.  Commanding a squadron, leading men in a POW camp, running a town, and running the largest state in the Union all require an individual to make tough decisions.  You can’t vote “present” and you can’t say that the issue is “above my pay grade”.  You have to make a call.

Andrew Sullivan writes:

From an Eagle Forum Candidate Questionnaire:

Q: Are you offended by the phrase “Under God” in the Pledge of Allegiance? Why or why not?
 

PALIN: Not on your life. If it was good enough for the founding fathers, its good enough for me and I’ll fight in defense of our Pledge of Allegiance.

The phrase was added in 1954.

Andrew, again, has not done his homework. The question was about the “under God” phrase, which, as historians of the American founding note, was added to the Pledge by Congress in 1954 precisely because it was uttered on several occasions by none other than George Washington, including this historically important moment:

The time is now near at hand which must probably determine whether Americans are to be freemen or slaves; whether they are to have any property they can call their own; whether their houses and farms are to be pillaged and destroyed, and themselves consigned to a state of wretchedness from which no human efforts will deliver them. The fate of unborn millions will now depend, under God, on the courage and conduct of this army. Our cruel and unrelenting enemy leaves us only the choice of brave resistance, or the most abject submission. We have, therefore, to resolve to conquer or die.
Address to the Continental Army before the Battle of Long Island (27 August 1776)

So, the journalism B.A. from the University of Idaho beats the Harvard Ph.D. (in political philosophy) yet again.

(cross-posted)

Read it here. The picture is below. Andrew Sullivan, however, seems hesitant to acquiesce.