Comments on: Palin's Polite Politics

By: Jack Slater

Jack Slater — Tue, 30 Mar 2010 22:22:31 +0000

Good article about Palin with some good reader comment as well in today’s Daily Bell:

http://thedailybell.com/928/Sarah-Palin-Still-Endorses-McCain.html

By: raylynn

raylynn — Tue, 30 Mar 2010 14:57:57 +0000

Don’t much like Sarah Palin, she seems nice enough but only mouths platitudes, minus the undergirding philosophy. When she ran with McCain she said she believed in man-caused global warming, is a big supporter of Title IV, which was totally destructive of men’s collegiate sports, and then decides “out of loyalty” to campaign for John McCain in these perilous times. What is she thinking? Many conservatives support her, the way many liberals support Obama; blindly! She is simply not fit to be president. On top of everything else she is a big war supporter, how does she think we can keep funding useless wars all over the worldwhen we are broke. It is just nutty treating her like some sort of Republican savior…

By: Barbara Grant

Barbara Grant — Tue, 30 Mar 2010 00:48:41 +0000

In my judgment, Palin paid her "debt" to McCain in 2008 by energizing the conservative base and delivering their vote, preventing a humiliating loss by the old "maverick." It's great that she endorsed Rand Paul, in particular, but what did that cost her? Why didn't she endorse Debra Medina in Texas, rather than Perry? Now that would have truly been "going rogue." And why does she insist that tea-partiers much choose a party (presumably, the Republican Party)? I don't see her actions as evidence of a philosophical disconnect; rather, they are consistent with what I perceive to be her current role as Republican party hack</a>, stumping for established, "safe" Republican candidates like McCain and Perry, while giving the occasional nod to a Paul or a Hoffman running against insignificant opponents. I think she is consolidating her position in the Republican Party, never straying too far from the main chance. What has she to lose, for example, by stumping for liberal McCain in very liberal Tucson?

By: John Danforth

John Danforth — Mon, 29 Mar 2010 22:51:39 +0000

Flaky? How about ‘philosophically adrift’?

By: Myron Pauli

Myron Pauli — Mon, 29 Mar 2010 21:34:59 +0000

Well, she owes him (personally for elevating her) so some loyalty is not out of line.

Nevertheless, I warn against anyone mistaking her for Aristotle. She is no philosopher and mostly acts from instinct (some sound). Still, “conservatives” are NOT libertarians even though they share some economic ideas (like lower taxes being a good thing).

By: Robert Glisson

Robert Glisson — Mon, 29 Mar 2010 17:51:38 +0000

“makes Palin seem a little flaky.” like a Pillsbury biscuit.

By: Steve Hogan

Steve Hogan — Mon, 29 Mar 2010 15:11:55 +0000

McCain is a corrupt political hack (a redundancy?). His only abiding principle is to get re-elected, which makes him just like every other lifetime politician.

And how does one stay in office decade after decade while convincing the voters that he’s a “maverick”? A maverick goes against the grain. Does something unconventional. Overturns prevailing wisdoms. McCain is none of these things.

I wish he’d just go away and stop being a nuisance.

By: james huggins

james huggins — Mon, 29 Mar 2010 12:10:58 +0000

Sarah marches to her own drummer. I think it was a mistake for her to support McCain. He stands for practically nothing Sarah’s supporters do. However, as you said, she is paying back for her great opportunity. Now she owes him nothing. Of course I can just see the media vultures crowding around as with a carcass on the African plains about Sarah refusing to back John when she recently consented to be his running mate. I believe this is her way of putting McCain behind her.