February 20, 2010

What does Sarah Palin owe John McCain... and what would she be without him?

Why is Sarah Palin "supporting a candidate [John McCain] that's held in very low regard to the tea party movement"? A caller asked Rush Limbaugh that on yesterday's show, and he said:
[I]f you're Sarah Palin, the one thing you know is that if it weren't for John McCain, nobody would know who you are right now.... And there's, you know, she has some loyalty there. I'm more puzzled by Scott Brown endorsing McCain and then having McCain come into his district so Brown can campaign for him.

I know why she's doing it. Look it: I haven't spoken to her about it, and I don't even want to put words in her mouth. I can only address this were I to be in her shoes. And she's a Republican, and she's made the case that she's a Republican, and this guy put her on the ticket, and had that not happened, she'd be "Sarah Who?"  She owes him something....

Okay, now, look, those of you out there in the tea party that are miffed at Sarah Palin and at Scott Brown, I just want to remind you of one thing, like I said the other day.  If Sarah Palin had not endorsed McCain, can you imagine what the press would do to her?  Can you imagine the refrain: "Oh, he's perfectly fine to be president, you'd run on the ticket with him as president, but he's not good enough to be Senator from Arizona?"  They would kill her.  And in the case of Scott Brown, McCain was the first senator to openly support Scott Brown.  He was being totally ignored by every other Republican in the Beltway.  It's the same deal, folks, it's just loyalty.  It just is.
Now, I think that's plenty of explanation for why Sarah Palin is supporting McCain and not helping J.D. Hayworth (who is challenging him in the Republican Primary).

But I want to talk about the idea Palin is indebted to McCain for bringing her into the political spotlight when he did. Is Palin better off because of that? She is what she is now because of that — because she was plucked unripe, tasted, and sneered at. She and we will never find out what would have happened if she'd been allowed to ripen through a term or 2 as Governor of Alaska and attempted a run for President on her own, building support, gaining seasoning, practicing dealing with debates and interviews while the stakes were still low and the press would be disarmed and friendly.

Just as we will never know The Other Hillary — the Hillary who would have evolved without Bill Clinton — we will never know The Other Sarah. The woman with a male sponsor, subordinate to a man — she may get very far but can she gain the ultimate trust, the Presidency? I have an intuition that our first woman President will be someone who fits the set with The Other Hillary and The Other Sarah.

63 comments:

Peter V. Bella said...

We will never know the other Obama, who, had he stayed in the senate and was seasoned another term or two...

Peter V. Bella said...

The Tea Party movement has a throw the bums out mentality for most of the Congress and Senate. They are getting just as bad as the Democrat party with their silly litmus test issues.

Sarah Palin loses nothing by taking the high road. She owes John McCain for making her a very public figure. She owes him for her new political/celebrity career. Some times dues must be paid. She is paying her dues.

AllenS said...

There's no such thing as The Other Joe Biden.

rhhardin said...

McCain has a strong need to display a sense of personal honor, as opposed to just having one without exhibition.

I don't know that Palin needs to be an enabler.

littlebeartoe said...

People keep talking about the perceived RINO McCain and the perceived right-wing Palin and wondering why even loyalty or party would tempt her to support him.

Not enough people are asking how Palin could support J.D. Hayworth, McCain's challenger for the GOP nomination. Hayworth is a buffoon with very right-wing views. Isn't it possible that Palin thinks McCain would make a better Senator for the term starting in 2011?

knox said...

Excellent post.

Lawler Walken said...

Maybe Sarah Palin likes McCain, thinks he's a good Senator and wants to see him reelected. What's wrong with that? As to whether or not she's better off because he asked her to run, apparently she decided she would be because she said yes. She's now a wealthy and famous woman who seems to enjoy her life just fine. And she's still got what mattered most before McCain picked her, a loving husband and family.

AllenS said...

Hayworth is a buffoon with very right-wing views

Scarey. Sounds like my kind of candidate.

Big Mike said...

I'm with littlebeartoe. I don't understand why Rush wouldn't consider the possibility that perhaps she's met Hayworth and regards McCain as the better person.

former law student said...

She and we will never find out what would have happened if she'd been allowed to ripen through a term or 2 as Governor of Alaska and attempted a run for President on her own

Would she have run for President? Her resume seems much like former councilwoman/mayor/Governor of a low population/remote from the mainland state, state university journalism grad Linda Lingle of Hawaii. The youngest mayor of Maui in history.

Lingle hasn't run for President on her own. I think, without being anointed by McCain, no one would have seen Palin as being papabile.

Linda Lingle Bio

Mikio said...

Althouse said...

"...and the press would be disarmed and friendly (toward Palin)."

If the press would be friendly toward such a conservative Republican as Palin no matter how “seasoned” she got, then it’s by definition not liberally biased like the conservative trope says. Careful, you’re slipping.

kentuckyliz said...

Subordinate to a man?

Why don't we discuss male vice presidential candidates this way?

Because it's a load of crap.

Political truism:
Dance with the one that brung ya.

Now, write about the Other Al Gore, and the Other Lloyd Bentsen.

Silly.

pm317 said...

I have an intuition that our first woman President will be someone who fits the set with The Other Hillary and The Other Sarah.

Oh, "NO, NOT THIS WOMAN" syndrome all over and all the time. Keep waiting! This is how patriarchy has gone on for centuries. You think men don't get a leg up with their connections? Would you wonder about the Other Bush, you know the guy who is not the president's son? Would you wonder about the Other Obama, but for his mysterious connections and exotic heritage, say a local AA like Sharpton for a father.

Hillary showed promise and potential when she started way back. If your culture was not this backward then, she and other women like her in her generation would have made attempts at the presidency sooner. Even now the woman makes an earnest and strong attempt at the presidency and shows abundantly clear that she is qualified, and women like you start asking "How did she get here? Why couldn't I get a presidency-potential husband? It is not fair. I don't want THIS woman." The stupidity of women who help perpetuate patriarchy. If you think you have made it all on your own, then run for office and show us.

Peter V. Bella said...

Hillary showed promise and potential when she started way back.

Way back when? The only reason she got elected only NINE YEARS AGO- was because Rudy Giuliani dropped out due to cancer.

If not for that, her only promise from "way back when" was to continue to be Bill's door mat.

Fred4Pres said...

I suspect Sarah would have been better off (in time) not getting tapped by McCain. That said, I would support McCain over Hayworth too. Medved argues why Hayworth is unelectable.

McCain has done stuff to anger me too. But he has not done so since his defeat in the election, in fact he has been pretty darn perfect in resisting the administration. Senate seats are too damn valuable to risk on a politician who very likely won't win in the general election.

c3 said...

Hayworth is a buffoon with very right-wing views.

Better said:
Hayworth is a buffoon

I live in AZ and that is an apt description of him. Am I surprised Limbaugh can't see that?


Note this quote from the wikipedia entry:
Several prominent local Republicans also crossed the aisle to endorse Harry Mitchell in the race

Yes, I recall a soft, collective sigh of relief among many AZ Republicans when he lost to Harry Mitchell (except for the Joe Arpaio Republicans.)

Hayworth is flash without substance.

Peter V. Bella said...

FLS,
Just like the resume of Obama.

John said...

John McCain did not bring Sarah Palin to the national spotlight. Sarah Palin brought Palin to the national spotlight. Yeah, McCain chose her. But, Palin could have said no. She is the one who said yes and all the resulting consiquences good and bad are thus her responsibility. I think she feels she owes McCain some loyalty for chosing her, despite the creatures who work on his staff. And she is paying that loyalty back. Good for her.

former law student said...

Would you wonder about the Other Bush, you know the guy who is not the president's son?

Nothing to wonder about. W. Strickland owns a propane dealership in Arlen, Texas. Hank Hill is his best salesman.

Just like the resume of Obama.

I don't get it. Did some Presidential candidate pluck Obama from obscurity?

Palin is like Lingle. Obama was never a mayor or a governor.

Paddy O. said...

"if she'd been allowed to ripen through a term or 2"

Yet, that wouldn't have prepared her for the national stage or the fierce attacks. The places she got hit the most were precisely those areas which as the governor of Alaska she wouldn't have dealt with.

Getting out onto the national stage early gave her a massive blitz of the worst forms of attack and showed her exactly her areas of weakness and ways her enemies would try to undermine her.

Now, instead of focusing on what she already did well, she is honing her strengths, sharpening her message, getting lots of attention, and is able to, no doubt, work on her weak areas.

She will be a much more potent candidate in the future because she won't be shocked by the press, opponents, or any nastiness.

former law student said...

John McCain to Sarah Palin: "You’re going out a youngster, but you’ve got to come back a star!”

pm317 said...

Way back when like here . It is a shame that this country with all its wealth and sophistication(apparently not) is backward enough that it does not give opportunities for women to rise.

BTW, your description of Hillary as BC's doormat says more about you than Hillary being a doormat if ever.

Synova said...

Blaming him when she said "yes" would be stupid. (Same with "owing" him on that one, of course. She said "yes.")

Throwing him under the bus would show a lack of character.

We know someone who does that.

Bush is criticized for refusing to toss the inconvenient and unpopular people, and I might be open to the argument that he took it too far, but this is a basic leadership principle. You have the back of those you work with, above *and* below you.

In any case, without John McCain Sarah Palin would still be a rising star. She'd be on the short list of governors that people were keeping eyes on.

AllenS said...

I must admit I know nothing of Hayworth. I will repeat, get rid of McCain. If you don't like Hayworth, then don't vote for him. When the election for Senate is held, vote for the Democrat. Get McCain out of there. Personally, I'd like to see the right-wing buffoon in there. But that's just me.

Kensington said...

1. Some of us were aware of Sarah Palin before John McCain asked her to be his Veep and had been watching her career with interest already. When McCain selected her, my response was not "who?" but "yes!"

2. Since we'll never know what might have been, there's little to be gained from speculating about whether she should have accepted his invitation. What happened happened.

3. I doubt her support for McCain's re-election is particularly fervent; I just think that the aggression that would be read into a lack of endorsement is much more than what she actually feels. So endorsing him is the closest scenario to the truth.

Peter V. Bella said...

pm317,
She was a junior lawyer who was appointed because she knew someone. Please. Bill walked all over her through out their marriage- door mat is appropriate.

As to the rest, her only resume is the fiction of her biography. Just like the failing President's/

Republican said...

Palin is not indebted to McCain. That's just something the tea/tards have come up with to justify why she doesn't always toe their line.

Palin has proved time and again that she answers to no man, not even her husband (who she rarely appears with). In fact, she doesn't get along well with men who try to push her around, like McCain's old campaign staffers.

I'm more interested in Limbaugh's hilarious assertion that Palin will do something she doesn't want to do, to avoid being criticized by the press.

Yeah, she's reaaaal sensitive to what the press has to say about her. (That must be another example of the "satire" Rush is famous for.)

edutcher said...

Miss Sarah was on the radar nationally before McCain picked her; in fact, there was Sarah for Veep movement. How much she owes him is limited.

I have to disagree with Peter V. except where he says, "Sarah Palin loses nothing by taking the high road.", and KYLiz is right about dancing "with the one that brung ya". This is a character thing, I think, and she's showing some class, given that McCain didn't do much to stick up for her after his ex-campaign staff started trashing her in an effort (abortive, IMHO) to save their careers.

pm317 said...

If your culture was not this backward then, she and other women like her in her generation would have made attempts at the presidency sooner.

It's different on Vulcan?

Paul said...

Paddy O has it right. She is lucky she was exposed to the unhinged left's demonic hatred when she was, and now she understands the enemy and can properly prepare to defeat them. I think she has shown a remarkable ability to do just that with a series of jujitsu moves that have garnered her more and more positive attention and have thrown the lefties in general, and the administration in particular, into a defensive position.

I think she's on the right trajectory to take the Presidency in 2012. The caveat being that anything can happen in three years of course, but as things look now I think she is several steps ahead of the pundits and critics in both her assessment of the national pulse and in crafting a strategy to tap into it.

Althouse's intuition is hard to take seriously after her falling for Obama's shtick. In fact I would venture to suggest that intuition is not her strong suit.

EDH said...

Mikio said...

If the press would be friendly toward such a conservative Republican as Palin no matter how “seasoned” she got, then it’s by definition not liberally biased like the conservative trope says. Careful, you’re slipping.


“Seasoning” is distinct from rising national significance, and I would qualify the liberal media bias Althouse points to this way.

First, there's a liberal media bias on issues, one that tends to increase the more the issue gains national significance and the attention of the national media.

Second, hostile treatment tends to increase toward politicians who start to gain nation prominence.

The divergence in treatment occurs as those two factors tend to interact exponentially for a conservative politician gaining national prominence.

For example, Palin had her enemies in Alaska, both liberal and "old boys" within her own caucus. But that was Alaskan politics. She never attracted the hostility of the national media until she rose to national prominence.

Sure, all national politicians do suffer the “try to knock him down on the way up” treatment from the press.

But compare the treatment of Edwards to Palin if you want to observe the true magnitude of the divergence in treatment.

I think Althouse’s point is that Palin might have been better suited to deal with the bias and hostility on the way up if she had “seasoned” more before her rise to national prominence.

But I get the feeling Mikio knew that and was just acting obtuse to try to score points.

wv-"plessi" = separate but equal

Julius Ray Hoffman said...

"The woman with a male sponsor, subordinate to a man..."

This is nonsense to those of us not steeped in academic sex roles. Sarah Palin is a person, not a walking vagina in search of an old white crusty champion.

On the other hand, your purpose in this post – and Rush's on his show – might have been to preempt criticism of Palin for stumping for McCain by saying "you did it first" to Democrats regarding Clinton.

Still, nobody really cares. A man is whatever room he is in; how he got there is something that can be disregarded. And that wisdom from Mad Men applies equally well for women in today's modern world.

JAL said...

So before McCain, who was the male who got Palin where she was?

And if her support of McCain is counterintuitive, it just goes to show she still works outside the box.

Wonder if some of Team McCain is freaking because of her support. If nothing else it shows this woman has a graciousness that would be nice to see in Washington.

Too bad some of the Republicans can't return the favor.

Roy Lofquist said...

Her nickname was Barracuda, not Buffy. I see glimpses of Indira Ghandi, Golda Meir and Margaret Thatcher.

Hi Mom!

Charlie Martin said...

Well, yeah, and she'll never know what might have happened if she'd stayed a hockey mom and never run for Mayor, or if she'd won Miss Alaska and then Miss America.

So?

Dudley Do-right said...

"Wonder if some of Team McCain is freaking because of her support."

Now there's a thought. Maybe we should be asking whether Sarah is "getting back at" McCain for his lack of support, by supporting him...

Dust Bunny Queen said...

Palin was/is in a no win situation.

If she endorses McCain, whether out of loyalty or from deciding that he would be the better candidate, she is railed at because she has abandoned the litmus test of 'pure conservatism'.

If she doesn't endorse McCain and endorses Hayworth, then she is an ungrateful backstabing bitch. The MSM would be all over her to attempt to show that she is unprincipled and has no character.

If she endorses no one and sits on her hands, then she would be portrayed as wishy washy, undecided and this held up, again by the MSM, as proof that she can't make decisions and should therefore never be considered for higher office.

Choice number one is the only one she could have made. Conservatives may not especially like her decision to endorse McCain.....BUT...conservatives do respect loyalty and would be willing to forgive her for the endorsement.

William said...

Edwards was an inexperienced senator who tried to exploit the fame that Kerry's choice granted him. Where would Edwards be without Kerry and what does Edwards owe him? Such questions are inapplicable. We arrive at certain moments by happenstance, but whether we exploit the moment or are devoured by it is dependent on our own character, ambition, and smarts.

lyssalovelyredhead said...

Bear in mind, too, that John McCain is certainly not without his problems, but he has also done a lot that is well-worthy of most Americans' respect. His millitary history is outstanding, he is a fierce fighter for what he believes is right, he is a true patriot.

When it came down to the presidential election, there were 3 things that were really important to me: judges, the war on terror, and spending. McCain's good on all of these, senate or presidency.

Yes, there are a lot of things to dislike about McCain. I was sorry that he got the nomination. But he is worthy of our respect, and I'm sure that Ms. Palin sees that.

lyssalovelyredhead said...

Doesn't anyone else resent Althouse's comparison between Palin and Clinton? McCain didn't treat Palin poorly (his staff did, and maybe he should have done more about that); he was always supportive of her. He didn't make any promises to her and publically break them.

I've always said that I could never respect Hillary Clinton because of what she allowed Bill to do to her. She's not a feminist icon, by sitting back and taking that kind of treatment. Palin's situation is completely different.

danielle said...

sarah palin could have said no. so there is no and never could have been any other sarah palin. what you see is what you get -- ambition and all.

danielle said...

'I've always said that I could never respect Hillary Clinton because of what she allowed Bill to do to her. She's not a feminist icon, by sitting back and taking that kind of treatment.'

I've never quite understood this argument. If feminism means some prescribed 'feminist' response to a particular situation, then how is that progress ? you'd think feminists would respect other women's right to decide how to manage their own personal lives, and not scorn another woman for not making the choice that someone else tells them they 'should' make.

traditionalguy said...

The setting in which we judge potential leaders is the biggest part of the puzzle. In times of peace we want an alliance making genius. In times of war we want an attacking genius until its over. But in today's climate of fifth columnists selling out for a seat in a lifeboat while arranging for the USS Titanic to sink with the rest of us aboard...then we need a leader whom we know will not sell us out, but one who will struggle to save our ship from sinking. Who cares if she is a certified genius? We demand true loyalty from the top down to us so that we will have a chance to survive Obama and Soros now intentionally steering our ship of state into iceberg fields at full steam with blinded lookouts.

danielle said...

oh, but i do agree that a blanket comparison between hillary and sarah is unfair. sarah palin could never dream of being as brilliant as hillary clinton. and hillary clinton could never dream of being as charismatic as sarah palin.

lets not forget though the age different between the 2 ... sarah has benefited from the changes in the way that the game is played, changes that hillary had to confront while the layers of glass were still being broken.

Jim said...

danielle -


I've never quite understood this argument. If feminism means some prescribed 'feminist' response to a particular situation, then how is that progress ? you'd think feminists would respect other women's right to decide how to manage their own personal lives, and not scorn another woman for not making the choice that someone else tells them they 'should' make.


But yet the "feminist movement" has ALWAYS been about telling what other women what they should or shouldn't be or want. It's always been an exercise in scrubbing out a woman's individuality and enforcing conformity.

Just look at the Tebow Super Bowl ads. How quickly did "feminists" who supposedly aren't pro-abortion, just pro-choice, jumped at attacking a woman who made a choice they didn't approve of.

They're worse than hypocrites: they're just flat-out liars.

Jon said...

Palin's stock has really been soaring on Intrade recently. The contract for 2012 GOP nominee now has her ranked #2 at $23, just barely behind Romney at $24.

Re: McCain, no, logically she doesn't owe him a thing, he didn't pick her as a favor, but rather because it was in his own self-interest. However it's understandable that she would feel a sense of gratitude nonetheless.

Paul said...

"palin could never dream of being as brilliant as hillary clinton"...

Puleeze. There is nothing brilliant about Hillary Clinton. Just naked ambition personified.

danielle said...

gosh paul, brilliance and ambition are not mutually exclusive. and i know that many people on the right hate hillary; but you'd think they could disagree with her, and even hate her while being honest about the fact that in terms of the breadth and depth of her understanding of policy, she's nearly unmatched among politicians.

even i can admit that, and i definitely didnt want her to win the dem nomination.

danielle said...

oh, and jim, c'mon. you know what you wrote about feminists is not true about all feminists.

you know, when you reveal so plainly that you hate them, it really weakens your arguments. but i guess some people just prefer to vent, eh ?

knox said...

When it came down to the presidential election, there were 3 things that were really important to me: judges, the war on terror, and spending. McCain's good on all of these, senate or presidency.

lyssa, I don't know. Spending? His record on earmarks was obv. good, but I would've liked McCain to have come out against TARP, not to run to DC to help get it passed. But admittedly, I don't have a strong enough understanding of the situation to know whether or not TARP was really necessary. It sure seems to be a hell of a mess now.

sydney said...

Palin does seem to go out of her way to be loyal to McCain. She spoke well of him in her book while dissing his campaign staff. But here's the thing. Throughout the book she complains about this ephemeral "headquarters" which issued bad decisions and commands to her daily. The staffers would tell her "Headquarters says we can't let you talk to the press," etc. And she would ask in the book each time, "Where is this headquarters?" I kept thinking - silly governor, headquarters is in McCain's brain! She gave him an undeserving pass on all those decisions passed on to her via his staff. But, as so many have said above, I suppose it would have been political suicide to do otherwise.

As for Hillary being her husband's doormat - we can never know the heart of another. Perhaps she geniunely loves him and forgives him his transgressions. At this point, it wouldn't be political suicide for her to ditch him, although it might have been once.

Alex said...

danielle:

sarah palin could have said no. so there is no and never could have been any other sarah palin. what you see is what you get -- ambition and all.

I thought the whole point of modern feminism was to allow women to express their ambitions. I guess not THIS woman.

Kirk Parker said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Kirk Parker said...

FLS,

"I don't get it. Did some Presidential candidate pluck Obama from obscurity?"

Actually, that was done a bit earlier by the head of the IL Senate Democrats.


Kensington,

"Some of us were aware of Sarah Palin before ... When McCain selected her, my response was not 'who?' but 'yes!'

Mine was more like, "Wow, was McCain listening to me???" :-)

danielle,

"in terms of the breadth and depth of her understanding of policy, she's nearly unmatched among politicians. "

That's a mighty fine assertion you've got there. Any chance you might proffer some evidence in support of it?

Maguro said...

but you'd think they could disagree with her, and even hate her while being honest about the fact that in terms of the breadth and depth of her understanding of policy, she's nearly unmatched among politicians.

Um, no. Hillary is a conventional liberal politician and the "breadth and depth" of her grasp of policy is typical of the breed. She's no better or worse than Biden, Kerry, or most other Democratic hacks out there.

If she was actually as brilliant as her supporters claim, she wouldn't have made a complete hash of the only significant policy challenge.

Enough of the "Hillary is the smartest woman in America" nonsense. It's patently false.

Paddy O. said...

Only fifty-four comments?! On a Palin Post?!

Once again, John McCain shows he is a drain on Palin's popularity.

former law student said...

you'd think feminists would respect other women's right to decide how to manage their own personal lives, and not scorn another woman for not making the choice that someone else tells them they 'should' make.


Feminism is about making one's own choices. Most of all, it is about having choices to make.

That's different from whether Hillary Clinton is a feminist icon or not. If HRC's path to success started with "First, marry Bill Clinton," other women will find it hard to emulate her.

"Wow, way to go Hillary! I'll try to marry the right man, too."

Kirk P. raises an interesting question about Obama. Did Palin have a mentor? Someone who saw promise, and helped her along?

Kirk Parker said...

FLS,

I'm not seeing the 'question raised' in the statement I made. We know who it was that boosted Obama (though I'm too lazy to go look it up at the moment) and also we're pretty sure that Palin made her way by opposing the local Old Guard of her party.

Mikio said...

EDH said…
I think Althouse’s point is that Palin might have been better suited to deal with the bias and hostility on the way up if she had “seasoned” more before her rise to national prominence.

But I get the feeling Mikio knew that and was just acting obtuse to try to score points.


So let me get this straight. Your translation of Althouse’s phrase disarmed and friendly as she described the press’s demeanor toward this hypothetically seasoned Palin actually means biased and hostile. That’s what Althouse actually meant by that in your mind. Leave it to a bagger from Opposite World to think those two phrases equate.

Not only that, but does Althouse actually think it’s the press’s job to be disarmed and friendly toward political figures as opposed to a position of, say, cruel neutrality? Apparently she thinks so in the case of Palin. Gee, do you think Althouse thinks the press should be disarmed and friendly toward Obama too? I’m going to go with no. But what is conservatism without its double standards and hypocrisy?

Bruce Hayden said...

First of all, Hillary was never really a doormat for her husband. She ran somewhat effective Bimbo patrols in the White House, and Bill had to actively evade such in order to get his jollies (i.e. sexually assault those women and get head from Lewinsky). That she could put that operation in place is significant. And back in Arkansas, it was she who kept running into financial scandals, with little help from her husband, except for him being the AG and Governor. She screwed up Whitewater, etc. with little help from him.

BUT, I doubt that she would have ever been a Senator without her husband having been President. While reasonably bright, she just isn't the natural politician that her husband still is. And I don't think that she has the personality to build up the political connections needed to run, esp. at a high level. She had them through her husband, but that just isn't something that I can see her developing.

I think that if she hadn't married Bill, she would have ended up as a partner in a decent sized law firm, possibly back in Chicago, and if she avoided getting disbarred for her greed, would be knocking back a half mill on up, and likely into seven figures, and have done well there for nearing 40 years. But she may not have had that level of greed if she had started making the sort of money that she would have in such a firm, from a decently young age. I think though that is possible that her greed is a result of seeing how well the rest of her YLS classmates did, who didn't move to Arkansas, but instead to the big cities with the big law firms that hired her YLS classmates.

Bruce Hayden said...

Personally, if I were in Palin's shoes, I would endorse McCain over Hayworth too. I don't think the later the clown that some here do. I have always liked the guy, and enjoyed him when he was on the radio. And while I sometimes like the idea of die hard strict conservatives, esp. in the Senate, I still think that McCain is by far the better candidate. And, I think that the people of Arizona are going to think so too. Yes, there are a lot of strong conservatives there, but a state that can elect Janet Napolitano to be AG and then Governor has to have a lot of moderates and liberals. McCain is a shoo in in the general election regardless of who the Democrats throw at him, because, if nothing else, Arizonans seem to love mavericks (and that isn't J.D.)

Also, I am big on loyalty. Palin would drop a number of notches in my estimation if she dumped on McCain here. Sure, she might have made it to the top tier without him, but the reality is that she didn't. He plucked her from the wilds of Alaska and dumped her on the national stage.

As for Brown, in addition from getting help from McCain, keep in mind that overall he is fairly moderate, as Republicans go. He just looked conservative because it was MA. He is definitely not the right wing zealot that J.D. Hayworth is, and I suspect would feel uncomfortable in his presence.

peter hoh said...

What does it mean that a post about Palin garners so few comments?

Tom said...

What people don't address is Palin when asked who she supported during the Republican presidential primary, she did not discount McCain.

So it is possible she was hedging her bets.

This was when McCain was just about dead last in the voting in Alaska Republican presidential primary.

And once Mccain was picked as the Republican presidential candidate, Obama was running neck and neck with McCain in Alaska.

It wasn't until he chose Palin did his numbers improve in Alaska.

McCain has never been good to Alaska, however, Alaskans put Palin in the postion to be chosen.

Palin has here loyalties wrong.

To say otherwise is illogical especially when you consider how McCain let his aides trash Palin.

It wasn't until McCain saw he was in trouble in a primary race that he cahnged his tune with Palin.

The man has gone against ANWR and sponsored regulation that has hurt energy development in Alaska and Palin endorses him?

Sorry Sarah. No Thanks. Hayworth will work with Alaska's congressional delegation to open ANWR, McCain won't.

Bluedog Alaska said...

"She and we will never find out what would have happened if she'd been allowed to ripen through a term or 2 as Governor of Alaska..."

Allowed to ripen? Are you kidding? This is the woman who said she didn't even blink when McCain asked her. (Of course, she also claimed that she asked her children first if she should do it. Later she wrote that she and Todd kept her nomination a secret before the family met up for her unveiling. So it's hard to tell what's true with her.)

Palin grabbed for that beautiful brass ring with both hands and never looked back. She was absolutely CERTAIN she was ready, should the nation need her services, god forbid anything should happen to a President McCain.

Who would she be without him? Probably gunning for Lisa Murkowski's seat in the Senate. Alaskans certainly didn't know a lot of things about Palin until the campaign, such as her habit of taking per diem for living in her own house or for charging her children's travel to the state. So maybe she could have kept that under wraps.

On the other hand, Troopergate was working into a real scandal before McCain sent a campaign lawyer named Ed O'Callahan to Alaska to fix things. So McCain actually helped save her bacon. And maybe that's why she's so loyal to him--a quality she has NEVER demonstrated to most of her political friends in Alaska.

Actually, now that I think about it, I can't think of a single politician or leader in this state in either party who supports her. Seriously.