Katie Couric, CBS News anchor and self appointed leader of the Sarah Palin attack pack, has renewed her three year long mission to rid the world of the threat of Sarah Palin as president. Her latest attempt to poison the public perception of Palin was on her news show last night.
She had the current Senator, Lisa Murkowski, write in leader in the Alaska Senate race, as a guest. It did not take Katie long to turn the attention of Murkowski to fellow Alaskan Palin and her qualifications to be president. Since Palin backed the Tea Party candidate who upset Murkowski in the primary, there was no love lost between them.
Couric urged Murkowski to unload on Palin and she did, saying some pretty critical statements as if she and Palin had known each other quite well for a long time. Which of course they did, at least know each other.
First, Senator Murkowski told the Associated Press on Friday that she wouldn’t watch former Governor Sarah Palin’s reality-television show about the state of Alaska.
Then Monday night, she added that she also doesn’t think Ms. Palin would make a good president.
“I just do not think that she has those leadership qualities, that intellectual curiosity that allows for building good and great policies,” she told Katie Couric on CBS News. “You know, she was my governor for two years. And I don’t think that she enjoyed governing.”
In the CBS interview, Ms. Murkowski said “we really don’t have much of a relationship.” She added that Ms. Palin “is not really that keyed into the state anymore. She is looking, obviously at a bigger pond.”
The Alaska senator added that she prefers a candidate who "goes to bed at night and wakes up in the morning thinking about how we're going to deal with" important issues.
Couric: "What's up with your relationship with Sarah Palin? Can you explain it?"
Murkowski: I'm still her senator. I'm going work hard to represent her, too. We don't really have much of a relationship."
Couric: "You have said you would not support Sarah Palin for president because she is not worldly enough."
Murkowski: "I just do not think that she has those leadership qualities, that intellectual curiosity that allows for building good and great policies. You know, she was my governor for two years. And I don't think that she enjoyed governing."
No matter what Palin does, Murkowski says 2012 is still a long way off and she's certain of one name that won't be on the ballot.
But didn't Katie forget to mention that Lisa Murkowski holds the Senate seat given to her in 2002 by her own father when he became governor amid cries of nepotism from the public? And didn't her father, Governor Frank Murkowski, purchase a $2.7 million jet airplane for the exclusive use of the governor, himself, in 2005? Wasn't it the same jet he took on a $13,000 Asian trip after he lost the primary election just before he had to leave office?
It was that jet and other allegations of corruption that convinced a young mayor from Wasilla, Alaska, a certain Sarah Palin, to challenge the mighty Governor Murkowski in the 2006 Republican primary where he finished dead last to Palin and one other challenger. After Murkowski spent 22 years in the Senate and 4 years as governor, Sarah Palin had brought his career in public service to a crashing end.
With Palin governor the state prosecuted Frank's former chief of staff convicting him of felony fraud in arranging corporate bribes for Murkowski's re-election campaign. Is it any surprise Sarah Palin opposed the daughter of the Governor she beat and endorsed a Tea Party candidate who won the primary/? Then again, Katie forgot to mention that there was a lot of bad blood between Murkowski and Palin ever since Palin drove her dad out of office.
Why would CBS bother with the facts or let us know the background behind the hostility Murkowski exhibited when asked about Sarah Palin by Katie Couric? It should be the truth and the public who decide if Sarah Palin is to serve us in any capacity, not Couric and the left leaning media.
For three years people like her have presented a one sided view of Palin, seeking out any rumor or fiction and putting it under the media spotlight in hopes it might make her look bad to the public. The Lisa Murkowski interview is just the latest example of CBS reporting along with such stellar masterpieces in investigative journalism like exclusive bombshell revelations about the Palins from none other than Levi Johnston, resident Alaska goof ball.
Let the people decide if Sarah Palin is qualified to be president with their votes, it is the American way. Just like it is Sarah Palins right to run for president should she so choose in our system of democracy. The media should stick to reporting the news, and stop trying to manufacture the news. That is the American way as well. .
Sarah Palin continues her record setting blitz on television as the premiere of her Sarah Palin's Alaska shattered the record for viewers on the TLC cable network with about 5 million viewers for opening night. For comparison Conan O'Brien pulled about 2.7 million while Jay Leno, on a network, pulled about 3.6 million on the previous Friday night.
This comes on the heels of her election night contribution to Fox News channel which increased ratings 20% over the 2008 election and double the 2006 election as the Fox cable flagship stunned the network giants by beating all three national networks with Fox cable pulling 6.9 million, NBC 6.2 million, CBS 5.8 million and ABC 5.5 million during prime time.
Fox News with Sarah Palin continues to dominate cable news with average prime time viewers at 2.1 million while CNN has 575 thousand, MSNBC 820 thousand, CNBC 188 thousand and HLN 472 thousand. In all shows Fox continues to pull two or three times more than the nearest competitor.
Of course it took a Palin to beat a Palin as Bristol Palin on Dancing with the Stars drew 20 million viewers in the most recent show just as Sarah Palin predicted. .
In the first post-election polls since the Midterms Sarah Palin has once again defied the liberal media and elitists and surged ahead of President Barack Obama in favorability and is in a dead heat in unfavorable ratings with Obama to the total chagrin of the reporters and pundits.
So terrorized are the liberals that they hailed the newest polls as a sign Palin is the most polarizing name in politics which of course is a blatant lie. What is the truth? In the latest AP GfK nationwide poll Sarah Palin has climbed to a 46% favorable and her unfavorable is 49% as of November 13.
In contrast, President Obama, according to today's RealClearPolitics Poll, stands at 45.4% favorable and 49.6% unfavorable. Bet you didn't hear the media report that our polarizing Palin is less polarizing than Obama.
The real truth is polls are all about trends and here the trend is real clear. Obama has been sinking in the polls for two years running as witnessed by the public revolt against Democratic leadership and the shellacking Obama took in the elections this month.
More ominous for the liberal media, the latest RealClearPolitics poll show an amazing 63.8% of the public believe our nation is on the wrong track under Obama's leadership. If 49.6% have an unfavorable opinion of Obama and 63.8% believe his policies are on the wrong track just who is the real polarizing figure in American politics? The numbers don't lie, it is clearly Obama. Just ask the 70 newly elected Republicans who won House and Senate seats November 2.
So Palin is gaining favorable ratings as Obama continues to slip. Is that enough? Well there is more. After two years of Obama blaming George Bush for every problem he faces, George Bush has gained 10% in favorable ratings and now is 44% favorable, again according to RealClearPolitics, while Obama is only 45.4% favorable, barely a 1% difference. In other words Obama has dropped over 20% since being elected while Bush has gained over 10%, a swing in the polls of over 30%.
Still that does not reflect the true trends because Obama faces a continuing string of challenges by the new Congress over his domestic agenda, while his international problems have continued to mount with every passing day. It appears that nothing will slow the difficulties of our president with the dragging economy and loss of international influence.
As for Sarah Palin, she has just started an eight week travel documentary on Alaska sharing with her television audience her love of the northern wilderness and she follows that with a 14 state tour promoting her next book which is certain to be a blockbuster like the last one.
Those who count Palin out should check their math because the numbers don't lie and attempting to show she is more polarizing than Obama is quite a joke as the mood of the public has demonstrated.
In recent years our political pundits seem to have forgotten Richard Nixon (1968) and Bill Clinton (1992) both won the presidency with just 43% of the popular vote and in four of the last five elections the winner received 50% or less of the vote. Sarah Palin is far from out of it and the trends are much more in her favor.
Almost every day of the week the bastions of the liberal media, The New York Times, The Washington Post, Time and Newsweek Magazine, MSNBC, even the Huffington blog run feature stories about Sarah Palin. If they dislike her so much, why?
Because Palin draws reader interest more than any other politician in America. Palin is plastered in the liberal media to sell the liberal media, pure and simple. The same way one of the top and most sought after celebrities for TV talk shows is none other than Sarah Palin. Oprah, Letterman, Leno, even Saturday Night Live see huge increases in ratings whenever Palin or her clone Tina Fey appear and that means higher ad rates and that means lots more money for the liberal media.
Nothing wrong with that, on the conservative side Roger Ailes was well aware of her ratings impact when he signed her to the Fox News network. She has been a welcome addition to Fox Shows like O'Rielly, Hannity and Beck because their audience increases and the ad rates increase. It is why Fox News continues to clobber the cable competitors in the Nielsen ratings.
Today, because finding a positive article about Palin is so hard to do in the liberal media, I'm going to showcase the dreaded Washington Post and a recent Palin article that appeared. In addition, Sarah Palin should be allowed to speak for herself for a change. She issued, in her own words, her version of what happened inthe elections. You should watch the video and get her version of what she thinks.
The Washington Post
Five myths about Sarah Palin
By Matthew Continetti Sunday, October 17, 2010
Think you know Sarah Palin? The former Alaska governor has been in the spotlight ever since John McCain named her as his running mate on Aug. 29, 2008. Yet, while practically everybody has an opinion about Palin, not all of those opinions are grounded in reality. Many of them are based more on a "Saturday Night Live" caricature than on the living, breathing, 46-year-old mother of five. The real Sarah Palin is a complex woman who has risen in no time from obscurity to the stratosphere of American politics, fusing celebrity and populism in novel ways. Now that she's laying the foundation for a possible presidential run in 2012, it's worth taking a moment to separate the facts about Palin from the fables.
1. Palin cost McCain the 2008 election.
She didn't. CNN's 2008 national exit poll, for example, asked voters whether Palin was a factor when they stepped into the voting booth. Those who said yes broke for McCain 56 percent to 43 percent.
Before Palin's selection, remember, McCain suffered from an enthusiasm gap. Republicans were reluctant to vote for the senator from Arizona because of his reputation as a maverick who'd countered his party on taxes, immigration, drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge and "cap and trade" climate legislation. But Palin's conservative record in Alaska and antiabortion advocacy changed the Republican mood. With her by his side, McCain's fundraising and support from conservatives improved. It wasn't enough to beat Barack Obama -- but McCain probably would have lost the presidency by a greater margin if he had, say, selected independent Sen. Joe Lieberman as his running mate, further alienating the GOP base.
Yes, it's possible that Palin's conservatism and uneven performance on the campaign trail shifted some voters to Obama's column. But even if Obama picked up some anti-Palin votes, he surely didn't need them: The economy was in recession, Wall Street was in meltdown, and the incumbent Republican president was incredibly unpopular. In the end, it's impossible to know how McCain would have performed if he hadn't selected Palin -- politics does not allow for control experiments.
2. Resigning as governor was rash.
No one expected Palin's resignation on July 3, 2009, just 2 1/2 years into her term. Her hastily composed and clumsily delivered farewell address left many observers confused about her motives. Some of her critics were only too eager to fill in the gaps with conjecture and hearsay (She's being investigated by the FBI! Sarah and Todd must be headed for divorce!). If there was one thing everybody knew for sure, it was that Palin's career in politics was over.
But none of the rumored scandals ever broke. The Palins remain married. And as for Sarah Palin's career, it's taken off. She plays a far greater role in American public life than she did before she left office.
When Palin returned to Alaska after the 2008 campaign, she confronted three problems. The political coalition on which she had based her governorship -- a combination of Democrats and renegade "Palinista" Republicans -- had collapsed. Her critics were using Alaska's tough ethics laws to launch investigations into her behavior, sapping her finances and her energy. Finally, every time she traveled to the Lower 48, Alaskans criticized her for putting her political interests above the state's.
Palin's solution was to resign. Her agenda stood a better chance of passing if then-Lt. Gov. Sean Parnell, who shared Palin's goals, succeeded her as governor. As a private citizen, meanwhile, Palin could make enough money to pay her legal bills. And she would no longer be accused of neglecting her official duties.
Some might say that Palin's resignation was shortsighted and showed that she was not ready for the demands of executive office. But if Palin had remained governor, she would have been denied opportunities to rally the tea party and fight in the battle over the Obama agenda. She would have been stuck on a regional stage. Instead, she's back on the national one.
3. Palin and the tea party are destroying the GOP.
You've heard the spiel: The Republican Party is in the midst of a civil war between moderate incumbents and far-right challengers backed by Palin and the tea party. Driving Charlie Crist from the GOP and defeating establishment figures such as Robert Bennett, Lisa Murkowski and Mike Castle spells electoral doom for the party. The only chance Republicans have for long-term success is to move to the center in a bid to win over millennials and Latinos.
But demographics aren't destiny, and no one knows what the future holds. The reality, right now, is that Palin and the tea party are saving the GOP by dragging it back to its roots and mobilizing conservative voters.
Remember, by the time Palin arrived on the national scene, the Republican Party was depleted, exhausted and held in disrepute. An unpopular war in Iraq, an economy in recession and GOP corruption had driven away independents. Meanwhile, massive government spending and a liberal immigration policy had dispirited conservatives.
This is where Palin came in. In the wake of Obama's historic victory, she and countless other grass-roots activists could have abandoned the GOP and turned the tea party into a conservative third party. They didn't. They decided instead to refashion the Republican Party from the ground up, pressuring it to live up to its limited-government ideals. Now, two years after Obama's win, Republicans are poised to reap major gains in the midterm elections. Palin and the tea party haven't hurt the GOP one bit.
4. Palin is extreme.
On many of the most important issues of the day, Palin holds positions that are squarely in the center-right of American political discourse. And many of those positions, not incidentally, are held by a large segment or even a majority of the public. For instance, neither the public nor Palin believes the stimulus worked. And while most Americans may not share Palin's views regarding "death panels," many join her in opposing Obama's health-care overhaul.
Over the past two years, Pew and Gallup surveys have tracked the public as it has moved to the right -- not on just one or two issues but on a whole constellation of them. Even on the controversial topics of abortion, guns and same-sex marriage, Palin is not as far away from the center as some suppose. A May 2009 Gallup poll, for example, found that a majority of Americans identified as "pro-life" rather than "pro-choice." In October 2009, Gallup measured record-low support for gun control. The public is divided on same-sex marriage, with about half the country joining Palin's (and Obama's) opposition.
5. Palin is unelectable.
Without question, a Palin 2012 campaign would be an uphill battle. Palin is unpopular -- massively so among Democrats, decisively so among independents. Even many Republicans don't believe she's ready to be president.
But opinions can change. Look at the political resuscitations of Richard Nixon, Ronald Reagan and Hillary Rodham Clinton. If Palin works hard and runs an impressive campaign, wavering Republicans and skeptical independents may give her a second look.
To earn that second look, she may need to find a big idea. It's hard to become president without one. Reagan had supply-side economics and the end of detente with the Soviets. Bill Clinton had the third way. George W. Bush had compassionate conservatism and the freedom agenda. Obama had national unity and hope and change.
At the moment, however, Palin still expresses her agenda mainly in negative terms, focusing on her opposition to Obama and the Washington establishment. She hasn't defined her "common-sense conservatism" in positive language. And she hasn't found a unifying, exhilarating theme.
Then again, she just might get along without one. After all, a presidential contest is a choice. The public might not love Palin. But by 2012, Americans might absolutely despise Obama. Two more years of a bad economy and an unpopular Afghan war, and anything is possible. Yes, there's a ceiling to Palin's support. But in 2012, there also will be a ceiling to Obama's.
Whose will be higher?
Matthew Continetti is opinion editor of the Weekly Standard and the author of "The Persecution of Sarah Palin: How the Elite Media Tried to Bring Down a Rising Star."
Love her or hate her Sarah Palin continues to defy the experts and embrace the people. Just look at what she helped the Tea Party accomplish yesterday in the midterm elections.
Tea Party House, Senate & Governor candidates - 129 Tea Party Winners November 2 vote - 113 Winning percentage for Tea Party - 87%
Perhaps the greatest achievement by the Tea Party yesterday was sweeping state legislatures all across the nation into the Republican ranks.
Of the 54 candidates across congressional, gubernatorial and other state races Palin personally supported who faced primaries, 42 won. Combined with the candidates she backed who did not face primaries, that left 49 candidates for the 2010 midterms. Of those, 28 candidates won, 15 lost and six races were still undecided by early Wednesday morning. Remember, many of these people were unknown until Palin endorsed them. .
If ever there was a clear case of how Sarah Palin is treated by the Lame Street media it is this latest gun battle. Sarah hear a tape of KTVA television reporters planning stories to smear the Palin backed Tea Party candidate in Alaska, Joe Miller, and understandably went public calling the actions and words of the reporters acts by "corrupt bastards".
She added that CBS might stand for the Corrupt Bastards Club in deference to the Katie Couric effort to embarrass her during a CBS campaign interview. The CBS network in NYC was inundated with calls about it and promptly put out the following statement:
“KTVA News is owned by the Alaska Broadcasting Co., not CBS. No CBS staffers were involved and CBS has no knowledge of and no comment.
Conveniently, CBS forgot to mention that KTVA is, in fact, a CBS affiliate just as Palin stated. One supposes they meant to imply they had nothing to do with KTVA. According to Wikipedia, "In the broadcasting industry (especially in North America), a network affiliate (or affiliated station) is a local broadcaster which carries some or all of the program line-up of a television or radio network, but is owned by a company other than the owner of the network.
That would indicate that KTVA is a CBS affiliate, contrary to the omission by CBS, and there is usually direct ties between the news departments of the network and their affiliates. With all the efforts by CBS to discredit Sarah Palin since 2008, did CBS news ever use the CBS affiliate reporters at KTVA for field reports from Alaska? Most likely, and if they did they are trained and indoctrinated in he network ways.
The actual CBS affiliate, KTVA, responded in an equally bizarre fashion. The station’s General Manager Jerry Bever vehemently denies that, responding on KTVA.com:
“While the recording is real, the allegations are untrue,” adding, “The perception that this garbled, out of context recording may leave is unfortunate, but to allege that our staff was discussing or planning to create or fabricate stories regarding candidate Miller is absurd. The complete conversation was about what others might be able to do to cause disruption within the Miller campaign, not what KTVA could do.”
The clips I heard clearly indicated the reporters were discussing ways to trap the campaign into bad press by searching out sex offenders in crowds at a Miller event or causing "chaos" at a campaign event and showing a fight. Try as they might, someone got caught planning a very un-journalism like attack on Miller and Palin was dead right, it does reflect the Corrupt Bastards in the media who attempt to manufacture the news.
.
After watching the evolution of the Tea Party over the past two years I often wonder if the Main street and Lame Street media who cover the Tea Party have listened to a word said by Tea Party participants. Since we know they condemned the Tea Party back in the beginning as dangerous radical fringe, and we know some in the media like Nora O'Donnell of NBC have been bitterly jealous or hateful of Tea Party leaders like Sarah Palin. Just yesterday O'Donnell said she was sick of hearing how Palin is "attractive and appealing".
So our first exposure to the Tea Party was the health care town hall fiascos of the Democrats when Nancy Pelosi said her congressmen were physically threatened by these radicals and her pit bull Steny Hoyer organized his own mercenaries to control the tea people, his being the SEIU thugs who claimed to put Obama in office.
Obama, Pelosi, Reid and all the liberal Democrats quickly joined the media trashing of the Tea Party people and apparently they thought the Tea people would just go away. Then along came the election to fill Teddy Kennedy's Massachusetts Senate seat and the radical Tea Party helped propel a Republican unknown named Scott Brown to a stunning capture of the Kennedy seat.
From that point on the Tea party treatment in the media changed, though not necessarily for the better. For the next year the media looked for every nut case, oddball sign and strange utterance from anyone even remotely connected to the Tea party in an effort to prove these were not ordinary citizens but were escaped mental patients.
But the scorn and disbelief by the media and politicians paled compared to the actions by the political parties as both joined in a holy war against the Tea party as both began to realize their old boy political network was threatened by these outsiders.
You see, the Tea party advocated a conservative platform aimed solely at the top issues of every citizen in America. Well, at least all the citizens except Obama and the Democrats who only seemed able to talk about health care, financial reform, and some stimulus that would keep unemployment under 8%. As the unemployment shot up to 9.7% it was obvious Obama and the Democrats had filed to see the light.
The Tea Party people wanted less government, a balanced budget and a reduced national deficit. Quite the radical agenda. There were no social issues. It didn't matter if you were Republican, Democrat or Independent, all were welcome to the Tea party movement.
It was about this time Sarah Palin and others took a very big chance and embraced the Tea Party movement and the grassroots candidates being fostered by the Tea party. The good old boys who controlled the GOP party had to be having fits and may even turned on Sarah to punish her for helping the enemy, outsiders that could not be controlled.
By the time the early primaries of this year came around the Tea party was knocking off Republican favorites and someone in the GOP machine woke up and realized if they embraced the Tea party primary winners, the Republican advantage in the off year election could be turned into a landslide.
Despite continuing efforts by a media appalled by the fact normal Tea party people thought they should be elected, and in spite of the media and Obama/Pelosi efforts to discredit and laugh off the Tea party, the outside radicals caught the attention of Main Street America and suddenly became a powerful political force Independent of the two old political parties.
Main Street Independents were first to embrace the ideals of the Tea party followed by disgruntled members of both the Democrat and Republican parties who were disgusted with the direction of both mainstream parties. Late last spring when the number of registered Independents in America surged past the registered Democrats and Republicans for the first time in over 100 years it struck a note of terror in even the old professional politicians.
Of course the media were the last to stop trashing the Tea party as the Lame Street media have never been known to catch on to popular opinion that conflicts with their own prejudices. Over 100 viable Tea party candidates got nominated to major offices and hundreds more are viable candidates for state legislatures and other local offices yet still the media focuses all attention on the political mistakes of a handful of Tea party candidates while ignoring the many legitimate candidates.
Just today the liberal mouth pieces of MSNBC were blaming the Republicans for letting "inferior" Tea party candidates run and win in primary elections when the GOP could have won the general election with traditional GOP candidates.
They still don't get it. The Tea party is not and never has been a Republican creation. Right now it is the only party in America that stands on it's principles. The Tea party would rather lose an election trying to get an outsider elected than back a candidate who will change positions to get elected. Such integrity no longer seems to exist with professional politicians or parties.
The Tea party winners will swell the GOP landslide because the GOP is opposed to the Obama agenda, pure and simple. It is the Obama agenda that has totally ignored the needs of the people. After the election, if the Tea party winners embrace campaign and campaign finance reform and force through, in order to stop special interests and the selling of America, long overdue changes, both political parties and the media will lose control of the national agenda and America will be returned to the People where it belongs.
By the way, the professional politicians might have pocketed more than TWO BILLION DOLLARS in campaign contributions, but the Main Street Lame Street media has pocketed over THREE BILLION DOLLARS in media buys from the same politicians and special interests. So just who do we think is owned by the billions in spending? .
As we finally head into the last 14 days of the election campaign Sarah Palin helped launch the final Tea Party Express cross country tour to help candidates as the election comes to a close. The New York Times says there are 129 Tea Party candidates running for the House and 9 running for the Senate. Of these, 33 House seats and 9 Senate seats have competitive Tea Party candidates, although less liberal groups believe far more seats may be in play. Beyond that there are a number of Tea Party candidates in the governor races, state legislatures, and even local offices.
Be that as it may, Palin and the Tea Party have written a new chapter in American political history with the first formidable launch of a movement that has a chance to evolve into a bona fide political third party. There has simply been nothing like it the past century in America.
It is true Ross Perot, who should be considered the Godfather of the Tea Party movement, did capture 19% of the vote in 1992 as a third party candidate but his efforts to form a defined political party did not succeed. Perot did, however, cost George Bush, Sr. his re-election as president. He also planted the seeds of discontent and provided a roadmap for future attempts to challenge the two party stranglehold on the American political process.
So far the Tea Party has organized as a series of independent groups, sort of a loose confederation, and has mastered much of the art of politics as seen by some stunning primary upsets. Within just a year they have demonstrated they are fearless, have weathered withering attacks by the left leaning media, the president and vice president, the congressional leadership, and the party spokespeople, while developing an ability to raise substantial money for campaigns.
In short, Sarah Palin and others give a face and a voice to the millions of disgruntled, disappointed, disgusted and determined citizens who have had enough government, deficit spending, increasing national debt and political double talk. Come November 3 we may find out just how much of an impact the silent voices of frustrated Americans might have earned.
It is clear in this election cycle the Republicans will be the primary beneficiary of the Tea Party movement because the GOP is the opposition to Obama and his left leaning agenda. But it is not clear that the Republicans can count on the long term support of the Tea Party, like into the 2012 elections. First and foremost, remember, they are Independents.
To the true Tea Party members neither political party offers much hope as they are equally responsible for being part of the old political establishment in our capitol. If the Tea Party stays with the Republicans it will only be because the GOP has changed for the better and is going to start practicing what they preach.
If they don't, look for the rise of a real third party challenge to our two party system.
There is one potential danger to the Tea Party solidarity should they decide to organize a challenge to the two party system. The only way the Tea Party could function as a national party is if they keep their platform and agenda focused on the priorities of limiting the size of government, eliminating pork barrel and deficit spending, and reducing the national debt.
Once you stray beyond the issues of economics or governmental powers, where the Tea Party members are united, and you get to the far more explosive social issues like abortion, prolife, gay rights, and many others, you begin to see the problem.
Many in the Tea Party want to adopt an expanded list of principles including social hot buttons, and then be uncompromising when pursuing them in congress and the White House. There are Tea Party members who are on both sides of most social issues. The passion for some of the causes is such they could never agree on a position. That is the long term dilemma facing Palin and the Tea Party.
They must find a way to unite as "outsiders" to fight the system while maintaining their own individual loyalty to certain causes not all will accept. If the GOP cannot find a way to accommodate these new advocates of the people, they will find another vehicle to mobilize around in the next election cycle, when Obama, the real threat to the Tea Party movement, is up for re-election. .
Thank goodness the politicians in Washington, DC have set a fine example and we are no longer required to tell the truth about anything because otherwise the latest polls would make little sense. However, the die is cast and the truth is lost and we only have about 5 more weeks of nonsense before the elections so here are the latest poll results as I see them.
Obama has slipped so low in the polls 2/3 of all Americans now want him to be Prime Minister of England or Australia.
The leftist liberals are held in such low regard by most Americans that the only TV ratings now recorded for MSNBC and CNN, America's answers to socialist Europe, are the staff of the two networks watching each other.
Of course liberals aren't the only ones having problems as the same poll shows all Republicans and Democrats over 65 and Newt Gingrich no matter what his age need to be sent out to pasture.
At the same time the people also believe the voting age must be raised to 28 years of age since the dumb kids got us into this mess electing Obama, Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid to lead us out of the darkness and into the night.
Speaking of Nancy Pelosi, 80% of all people refuse to believe she is the leader of the majority party as even Democrats can't be that stupid.
Voting for the person the public most wants to see on Dancing with the Stars next season was tied with over 90% wanting Barack Obama and Sarah Palin for the next two seasons, 2011 and 2012, so both will be too busy to run for president.
In terms of education issues, over 70% of the public says the Obama's could not have attended the exclusive Ivy League schools of Columbia and Harvard for Barack, and Princeton and Harvard for Michelle, and still claim to be plain old American middle class folks.
An astounding 100% of the people want to see only one debate in this fall's election, and a team debate at that. They want the team of Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck for the right wing against Arianna Huffington and former VP Al Gore for the socialists with the winners decided by whichever team can figure out what the hell the other team is saying first.
The Supreme Court decision to not allow election ballots to offer the choice, "none of the above", which was rejected by the Supreme Court on grounds the public has no right to so directly influence an election, was opposed by 83% of the public.
67% of the public say VP Joe Biden was inconsistent when he admonished fellow Democrats to stop whining the same day Barack Obama was again whining about the endless curses George Bush left him over the past eight years even though George Bush left office nearly two years ago.
Oh yes, and 91% of the public believes we are much safer and the economy will recover only if congress and the Obama's stay on vacation all the time. .
Obama's criticism of Sarah Palin for inexperience is his own Achilles heel.
He campaigned by condemning Palin for her inexperience and the public bought it but in the end the disintegration of his own staff reflects on his own inexperience in policy and real world challenges. As the integrity of his economic, health care and foreign policy are challenged and word leaks out on how he constructed and pursued his agenda of change the cerebral approach to the presidency he displays is daily being undermined by the exodus of key staff and leaking of internal policy disputes.
First came the departure of three of his top economic advisors, the latest being Lawrence H. Summers, who will step down as director of the National Economic Council. His abrupt resignation follows that of Budget director Peter Orszag who left in July, and the chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers, Christina Romer, who left earlier this month. Only embattled Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner remains of the original Obama team.
Since when did the architects of the most significant economic changes in our nation's history, to paraphrase the White House spin, run for cover before their plans are even implemented? Could it be a forewarning that the White House intellectuals failed to understand the politics of governing and have decided to abandon ship before they are blamed for the failures?
Health care looms as a second backdrop to the policy problems of our young president as health care costs continue to rise after passage of the Obama bill while trillion dollar price increases were postponed by the White House until after the 2012 election and they cast a dark cloud over our future. More evidence of the policy failures and failure to read the public mood by the president's team.
Today's disclosure by The New York Times of the vicious policy battle over the war in Afghanistan as disclosed in a new book by Bob Woodward indicate Obama gave up trying to build a consensus in his own staff and made up a strategy with no basis in fact. Coming just six weeks before the midterm elections the impact of Woodward disclosures could be further devastating to the hopes of Democrats of keeping control of the Congress.
With Rahm Emanuel, Obama's chief of staff, ready to jump ship and run for Mayor of Chicago those with the least practical experience will be left in the White House. One wonders why Emanuel would trade running the White House for being mayor of a city but he knows what we don't know about the state of the state.
Obama built an administration with many educators and friends and a cadre of former Clinton people but the theoretical world of academia is a far cry from the hard knocks of reality and many of the Clinton people were the previous architects of policies and procedures that caused the economic collapse. There are times when even experience is bad if it did not contribute to the public good, a fact President Clinton recognized when he apologized for the economic and regulatory changes these people made late in his presidency.
Obama can still salvage his final two years if he does not make the same staffing mistakes again as he replaces all those staff running for the turnstiles. Of course his administration still remains bloated with academics and arm chair activists with no clue as to the policy process, the art of compromise with Congress and the meaning of bipartisanship so the purge must go much deeper if he is to be a success. .
The two year preoccupation of the liberal media in trashing Sarah Palin leaves little room for ouside opinions on her from people not interested in protecting the Democrartic majority in America but it is refreshing to see that not eveone in the world thinks she is bad. In fact some unlikely people also think the Palin coverage has misled the American electorate like the story below.
Why I support Sarah Palin
Ted Belman. I was half way through writing Sarah Palin is electable when I came across this fabulous well researched ode to Sarah Palin. I have left out the attacks on her particularly by the GOP trying to shut her out and focused on her outstanding qualities. Don’t miss the part on Israel and Iran at the end.
Vetting Sarah Palin—The Assignment of a Lifetime
By Christopher Massie, Canada Free Press
There is a wave now clearly rising. There is a movement very definable now fully exposing itself to America. The Tea Party now has more successful wins to its credit within a condensed timeframe than any other American political movement can rightfully claim. This movement is alive, palpable, real, not to be ignored and poised to return America to its position as that Shining City Upon the Hill. And one individual is responsible for this momentum.
That person is Sarah Louise Palin—and this is her vetting.
SARAH PALIN—THE EARLY YEARS:
Sarah Palin, a 46 year old, self-described “Bible-believing Christian”, born in Sandpoint, Idaho, the United States of America, has represented Conservative Constitutionalism, small business entrepreneurs, lower taxes, fiscal responsibility, non-partisanship, pro-life advocacy, the Amendments (as a staunch Constitutionalist), but in particular the 2nd, and political term limits (among her most prominent platforms) her entire political career. She abhors wasteful government spending—a cause Palin is so deeply passionate towards it would launch her Mayoral career in 1995—and Palin considers the current administration the bane of current as well as future generations to come.
Governmental corruption goes against every core belief inherent to Palin’s persona—her programs to vet those within her administration are well documented. Inter-departmental deceit and immorality have been dealt with through patience and diplomacy, but dealt with they have been. In Palin’s nearly 20 year political career, she has positioned herself as a fresh and rejuvenating force for positive upward mobility in the Republican Party, and her current influence is instantly perceptible.
At the age of 18, when most American teenagers were deciding on far less important issues, Sarah Palin officially registered as a Republican, a decision no doubt based on values deeply entrenched within Palin throughout her upbringing. By the age of 28, that decision would prompt Sarah to enter politics for the first time, pitting her against a local telephone company worker. That election would mirror many in Palin’s future political career; voters in Wasilla questioned her ability to defeat a man, much less her ability to have a serious affect on the City Council.
She would win that election to the City Council of Wasilla, Alaska—an election she was encouraged to enter by fellow classmates of hers at a local step aerobics center. Also members of this class were two gentlemen who would later play a central role in Palin’s advancing career. Three years later, after shocking voters by not allowing her personal religious convictions to interfere with her role on the Council—as it related to small business owner’s rights—she would be elected again; this time by an overwhelming majority.
Upon completion of her first term on the City Council, midway through satisfying her second, Palin would set her sights on higher office, electing to run for Mayor of Wasilla. Her bold decision to seek the office of Mayor was based on her fears that the local government was wastefully spending revenues generated by a new sales tax increase. The city’s coffers were expanding, the then-current administration had drawn up plans requiring unnecessary, frivolous spending, and Palin—reflecting her classic Conservative ideals—announced her campaign.
This would be the first real test of Sarah Palin’s mettle as a Conservative politician—and as a woman running against the good old boys. That race would match Palin against her one time aerobics class partner—one of the men pivotal to her ascension into politics—then-Mayor of Wasilla John Stein.
Then-Mayor Stein never knew what hit him. Then 32 year old Sarah Palin was a formidable foe. Exposing Stein’s proposed spending and record of high taxes, as well as sharing her other campaign platforms with the voters of Wasilla—a voting majority comprised, by the time of Palin’s rise, of Conservative Christians—that included her pro-life and pro gun-rights stances, Sarah defeated Mayor Stein handily. Her platforms, campaign strategies and overall ideology caught the attention of the state GOP as well. The Party would endorse Palin over the three-term incumbent Stein, running television ads on her behalf—cementing a political relationship for better or worse. By the conclusion of the campaign, Palin’s political reputation had begun to take shape.
MAYOR PALIN:
Once in office, Palin’s inaugural actions included the lowering of her personal salary by 10%—a move most voters (while appreciating the gesture) probably doubted would come to fruition. From there, the internal vetting of the previous administration would begin. Palin required updated resumes from every official, going so far as to demand resignation letters from particular department leaders most loyal to the former Mayor. Her moves, while unconventional, proved beneficial towards ferreting out true team players from those whose personal goals and biases would prove to undermine the role of government—that role, for Palin, being a small unified body working to effectively service the voting community. Palin’s successful process to unify or dismiss resulted in a first term staff turnover of nearly 100%—but the voters remained quite pleased. Palin listened to her constituency; and the voters elected her again—by a landslide!
Palin’s second term would witness her contributions to this once sleepy little town of Wasilla resulting in an expansion that brought business revenue and improvements to the city as never before. And while growth most certainly has the potential to come at a price (Wasilla’s long term debt would increase to $25 million as a result of expansion under Palin, leading her to secure the first of $10 million in earmarks for the government before her term would expire), today, Wasilla is a thriving community.
The current mayor attributes Wasilla’s 50,000 daily shoppers directly to Palin’s 75% reduction in property taxes and infrastructure improvements. “This is no longer a little strip town you can blow through in a heartbeat”. Wasilla, strong, proud, and now home to more than 6,000 people, remembers well the ways in which Sarah Palin heard their voice, listened to their demands, and bettered their lives. The old boys’ club was forever changed in Wasilla, and the GOP took notice.
SARAH PALIN GETS A TASTE OF THE WHITE HOUSE EXPERIENCE:
Sarah Palin’s next move, at the age of 38 (in 2002), was a bid for Lieutenant Governor of Alaska—running against 4 other Republicans in a primary in which she came in second. This loss would expose Sarah to what was possibly the most extreme case of political nepotism she had yet witnessed in her career. After her defeat for Lieutenant Governor of Alaska, Palin campaigned intensely throughout the state of Alaska for Frank Murkowski and Loren Leman—the team running for Governor-Lieutenant Governor of Alaska. Sarah Palin would spend countless hours rallying for Frank Murkowski, befriending the man, cheering him on—hoping his win would secure for her his vacated seat in the Senate. Murkowski won. Palin was on the short list for his vacated Senate seat—everyone said she was a shoe in.
In what continues to this day to be called one of the most flagrant displays of unwarranted nepotism, Frank Murkowski—in typical old boys’ school demeanor—selected his daughter, State Representative Lisa Murkowski, to be his successor in the Senate. Palin would instead be offered and accept an appointment to the Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Commission, where she would expose myriad ethics violations. The old boys’ networks would continue to be served notice, and Murkowski and Palin would be set on an inevitable collision course that would collide just a few years later.
In 2006, at the age of 42, against all odds, first facing down Murkowski’s formidable war chest of funds, and later defeating Democrat Knowles by a margin of 48 to 40 percent, Sarah Palin became the youngest Governor of Alaska in history—as well as the State’s first female to ever hold the position.
Understanding the voice of the voters, she ran on a platform of education first, followed by public safety and transportation. Her long-standing role as a pro-life proponent gained her the endorsement of the Alaska Right to Life group while her concerns with the environment combined with her continued advocacy for Alaska’s oil industry garnered her support from former Alaska Governor Walker Hickel. An additional endorsement, based on Palin’s recognized position on second amendment rights, would come from the Alaska Correctional Officers Association; indeed, through endorsements, Palin would succeed in winning the Governorship even while being outspent throughout the campaign.
Naturally, as with any position of such great importance and responsibility, attacks upon the one in office are inevitable—and Sarah Palin was no exception. For the record, Troopergate was finally concluded in 2008 with a final report from Tim Petumenos: “There is no probable cause to believe that the governor, or any other state official, violated the Alaska Executive Ethics Act in connection with these matters.”
While ethics issues certainly weigh heavy in every politician’s career, other more important issues have been, and continue to be, placed center stage by Palin’s opponents. Since her days as Governor, Sarah Palin has strongly pleaded the case for America’s independence from its reliance on foreign oil suppliers. To that end, Palin supports drilling for oil and natural gas in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR). And while this controversy has been one of deep concern that continues to provide contentious discourse between conservationists and economists, Palin remains firmly planted on the side of job creation, revenue procurement, and American energy independence.
Palin remains a committed environmentalist, as evidenced by her establishing of the gubernatorial executive order number 238 which, among several other key provisions, calls for “developing recommendations on the opportunities to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from Alaska sources, including the expanded use of alternative fuels, energy conservation, energy efficiency, renewable energy, land use management, and transportation planning.” Palin’s ANWR stance, combined with this order, clearly demonstrates Palin’s ability to balance a fiscal need for energy independence against a respect for “green” initiatives—truly a rare trait in today’s old boys’ networks.
PALIN THE GALVANIZER:
Throughout her career, Sarah Palin has witnessed and battled cronyism, nepotism, old boys’ networks, corruption, and political deceit of every size, shape and description. Her wars raged have been born from Conservative ideals, Christian values, the fundamentals found in the words of America’s Founding Fathers as written in the Constitution, and a plain old sense of knowing right from wrong. These ideals, shockingly—not surprisingly—have rendered her the target of great condemnation from socialists, Liberals, Democrats and even certain members from within the GOP—that party once so eager to embrace her in the days of Wasilla.
As the GOP has ungraciously turned its back on Sarah Palin—as particularly evidenced through the actions of one of the most glaring examples of the old boys’ network, John McCain—she has continued along the path of adhering to the voters; ever cognizant of the true Conservatives requiring support. She has been the driving force unifying the Tea Party movement in America—a once loose knit group of a few hundred people that now counts hundreds of thousands of well organized members in practically every state of the union. This movement draws inspiration from a unified mission: lower taxes; smaller government that interferes less with the population’s private lives; state’s rights; and an overall belief in American Exceptionalism. These are core, fundamental issues Sarah Palin has stood for her entire career.
Sarah Palin—through her support of and involvement with the Tea Party in general—has in one way or another had a positive effect on the campaigns of several Tea Party-backed Conservatives this election cycle. Some of the candidates who have included Palin in their projects or discussed her influence as having a positive upshot on their drives this year include Pat Toomey, Marco Rubio, Mike Lee, and others. And those candidates who have succeeded in their bids for office as a direct result of Palin’s endorsements include Rand Paul, Sharron Angle, Joe Miller, and, of course, Christine O’Donnell. Sarah Palin’s clout is more than influential—for many in the truly Conservative camp, it is the most powerful weapon in politics since that witnessed by Ronald Reagan’s allies in the days of the Gipper’s reign.
The ability to galvanize on Palin’s part—the ability to bring together the voice of the voters and the electable candidates proven to answer the call of those voters—is a powerful magnet in a politician. It is also a fantastically rare commodity. One truly believes Palin’s honesty; her words—humble and forever unassuming—consistently come from the heart. When she speaks to a crowd, it’s as if she is talking to her family; never scripted, oft-times with a slip or a twist of the tongue, and genuinely caring.
Remembering speeches given by Ronald Reagan—when he would pause, almost coming to tears contemplating the severity of his words—one cannot help but catch glimpses of these mannerisms in moments of Palin on stage. She is captivating in her simplicity, powerful in her convictions, Reagan-esque in her Conservatism, Constitutionalism and belief in American Exceptionalism.
THE GOP TAKES A PAGE FROM THE DEMS PLAYBOOK:
As this nation heads towards November, a crucial turning point in American history, Palin’s foes are making hay. Political strategists the likes of Karl Rove and Charles Krauthammer have emerged from the old boys’ network closet. The most infamous, nepotistically-influenced, former Palin competitor Lisa Murkowski has announced she will run again this November—as a write in. In these days, it is wise to recall the actions of Harry Reid in 2006 when he summoned then-Senator Obama, instructing Barack it was the Party’s intentions to have him run for the Presidency (even though it would not be until the summer of 2008 that Reid would publicly endorse the Senator from Illinois).
The Democrats (led by Reid) would have done anything to defeat Hillary—and they did it stealthily. The GOP is taking a page from that book. There is an all too familiar episode re-playing itself for voters to witness this season. The GOP loathes Sarah Palin. And the Party is now setting about to deeply unsettle those successful candidates she has promoted. The evidence is glaringly obvious. Murkowski has been unleashed; Rove and Krauthammer are doing their bidding. The events unfolding are towards one goal: the destruction of Palin’s bid for the Presidency.
Beginning with Sarah Palin’s first mayoral bid in Wasilla, and her refusal to kowtow to the GOP in the aftermath of her ascension to city office—a position she rightly earned regardless of Party politics being played out on the local airwaves—to her days as Governor of Alaska and her patriotic decision to place more emphasis on the needs of the voters of her state than the bureaucratic strong-arming of the Bush administration and its political blackmail as it related to the Alaska pipeline contracts, Palin has steadfastly remained a true person of character—and a life-long politician representing “We the People”. Now, in what has become America’s deadliest fight against tyranny since its founding, this nation’s leader in waiting listens for her constituency’s demands once more.
PALIN—THE VITAL POINTS:
There can be no doubting Sarah Palin’s longstanding, steadfast commitment to a strong, stable, secure and Exceptional America at home. Also without question is the importance of America’s safety abroad and its allegiance to our allies. Since the days of this nation’s founding, freedom has come at great costs; never has security from tyranny been free.
Allowing for the rise of injustice, murder, torture, attack or any other form of degradation to another nation, be that persecution in the name of political gain, religious dominance and expansion, or sheer bigotry and ideology, it is the moral responsibility of the nation of the United States to stand up for the rights of the less fortunate and oppressed. Never in the history of man has the allowed suffering of another nation, creed, race or religion resulted in anything other than millions of deaths and suffering; likewise neither has the ignored spread of hatred, socialism, Marxism, Nazism, Trotskyism or other form of sociopathic ideology or sociological theory left any positive remains in its wake.
Sarah Palin has vowed, in her own words, that there will be: “no doubt: I will always keep the threat of military action on the table to defend our security and our ally Israel,” further swearing, “Israel is our strongest and best ally in the Middle East. We have got to assure them that we will never allow a second Holocaust, despite, again, warnings from Iran and any other country that would seek to destroy Israel that that is what they would like to see. We will support Israel. A two-state solution, building our embassy, also, in Jerusalem, those things that we look forward to being able to accomplish, with this peace-seeking nation, and they have a track record of being able to forge these peace agreements.” Palin will immediately look to mend the relations so quickly crushed and thrown to the wind by the current administration.
Palin also will not allow for an unchecked, nuclear Iran. Considering the flaccidity of the current administration as it pertains to the Bushehr reactor debacle, in fact, Palin should have been in control of that issue from the beginning: “A leader like Ahmadinejad, who is not sane or stable when he says things like that, is not one whom we can allow to acquire nuclear energy, nuclear weapons… is downright dangerous because leaders like , who would seek to acquire nuclear weapons and wipe off the face of the Earth an ally like we have in Israel, should not be met with without preconditions and diplomatic efforts being undertaken first.” (WIKIPEDIA)
In closing it is fantastically imperative to reiterate one fundamental element of Sarah Palin’s political and personal persona: she is first and foremost a Christian. Second, and equally as important, she is a Constitutionalist. Defining those terms in the context of how she will lead a country requires one simple review of the Founding Fathers. She has never allowed religion to interfere with her duties as a servant to the people—ever. She has forever listened to the voice of the people—always. She has in all public duties eschewed obfuscation—consistently. She is the one true voice of the people—and so too have her soldiers, her armies, always been.
This city on the hill has grown dim. Sarah Louise Palin is the lantern to light that torch for the world to once again turn towards.
From someone who knew someone who worked with her over the years:
CO. Hoosier, I’m not even sure that I can be classified as a “Palin fan”, but I am kind of an observer. An old school buddy of mine has worked within the Alaska legislature for the last twenty years or so. He’s a registered Democrat and has worked on projects that allowed him to cross paths with her going back when she was a city commissioner, as the mayor, and as the governor.
He told me that the picture painted of her as a mindless ideologue is about 180 degrees off base. He said that over the years, he’d probably dealt with her a couple of dozen times and that her input and/or decisions were always supported by law and not by personal beliefs.
The thing he told me about her that really peaked my interest of her was her ability to process information and then to quickly forge a plan with the information she was given. He said she was a living, breathing CPM chart. He said he had seen her on multiple occasions on a variety of subjects instantly absorb input from others and then respond with cogent solutions to problems. He said if you put her in a room with a bunch of people, the chances would be great that she’d be the smartest one in the room.
He told me that when he saw her debacle with Katie Couric, his first thought was, “who is that Sarah Palin imposter?” He said that was not the Sarah Palin he had worked with for years. He was sure that the interview was highly edited. It came out later that there was almost six hours of the interview that people didn’t see.
He told me that if I really wanted to get a feel of who she is and how she dealt with powerful people, I should read the book, “Sarah Takes On Big Oil”. It was released in October, 2008 and written by two of the state’s top oil & gas editors. The lady they described had no fear to stand toe-to-toe with heavyweights and leave them slinking away with their tales between their legs. She told them that she was the advocate of the citizens of Alaska and there would be no deal making that would adversely affect them. The big boys at Exxon-Mobile and BP folded like a cheap suit.
One other thing he told me that still amazes him was how she managed to get people to work together. According to him, she could take two people with opposing opinions, sit down with them, listen to them, offer her solutions, and both guys would leave happy and not feeling that they had compromised their position at all.
He laughed at the “she doesn’t read” meme. He said it is well known in the capitol that she was a voracious reader. She truly did read most of the national mags and newspapers, mostly on line, as well as a dozen or so energy trade magazines. According to him, there were stories about how she would take home stacks of papers and reports to prepare for a next-morning meeting and it was as if every word of those reports were stamped into her brain when she sat down at the meeting.
He told me not to be fooled by her syntax or her colloquialisms because they were not a fair barometer of her smarts. He said if people would just listen and not try to read between the lines, she was easy to understand. He said he’d love to see her and Obama in a debate about energy or even healthcare. He said she’d clean his clock. He even said that if she were given a day or two to prepare for a debate on foreign affairs, his money would still be on her.
He said she was the epitome of a leader. She assembled her staff, listened to their advice, allowed opposing ideas to be heard, and then acted accordingly. As a manager, she advocated making a plan based on the best info available, budgeting the plan, working the plan, measuring results, and quickly adjusting the plan if it was determined it wasn’t working as expected. She believed in the First Law of Holes.
He thought her biggest struggles in the 2008 campaign were the product of trying to endorse McCain’s positions on issues. She was able to voice her dissenting opinion on ANWR because her views were known, but on everything else she was expected to toe the McCain line. He said that she lacked the ability to shovel crap and sell it as perfume.
He reminded me that anyone who denies the accuracy of her “death panel” metaphor should go back and read her exact words, both her initial FB post and her rebuttal of Obama’s attack on her words. He said “read what she wrote, not what someone wrote or said what she wrote”. Her words in those posts have already been proven to be true.
He said that “divisive” is not a word that should be used to describe her. He said that was just a simple use of Alinsky’s rule #13. He said, “look at all the issues. Her position is in line with the majority on virtually all of them”.
He told me she wasn’t perfect, but if I read something or heard something that was negative, I should check it out a little closer. He shared a lot more, but I’m afraid I’ve already rambled on for too long.
Should she run in 2012? I really don’t know. Would I vote for her? It depends who she’s running against. Will she drive the agenda if she doesn’t run? Yes, for a long time.
