RT @CMDeB: Sarah Palin is a failed governor and failed VP candidate. She’s basically an unemployed woman. Why is she even relevant?
RT @CMDeB: Sarah Palin is a failed governor and failed VP candidate. She’s basically an unemployed woman. Why is she even relevant?
How retarded.
How do you define success or failure as a “VP candidate”? Heck, the role of a duly elected VP is so limited, I’m not sure how you even gauge success or failure for the one who wins!
I also don’t see how she can be considered a failed governor. She was seen as a maverick and a wild success up to the point she was picked as McCain’s running mate, after which time her national stature led to a much higher profile and better funded / organized opposition (including relentless lawsuits). Her response was to step down so someone else could actually carry out the job duties and she could fill out her new, higher profile role in the national spotlight.
Almost right, AML, but to be fairer than Palin’s detractors on this blog will ever be, it’s at least not completely and utterly outlandish to see a governor who resigned the office as a failure. Not that that is what Brendan was talking about, of course … he presumably thinks she’s a failure because she is “morally unqualified” for national office, statewide office, or pretty much anything other than running laps and banging her husband. I don’t know all the details surrounding her resignation — the crazy left said it was because her ouster from office in scandal-ridden disgrace was imminent, while her staunchest supporters said it was because she was hassled by frivolous ethics complaints. Whatever the reason, not finishing your term for reasons other than health can I think rightly be considered a failure.
To the extent that I add my own commentary to a retweet, it either appears before the letters “RT,” or at the end of the tweet after the “|” symbol. In this case, I didn’t add any commentary at all, I just straight-up retweeted it.
P.S. In case anyone is curious, although I’m not familiar with @CMDeB (I found her tweet via Doug Mataconis), her profile describes her this way:
Doesn’t sound like a member of the “crazy left.”
Well its easy to be catagorized as part of the “crazy left” when you define it as anything left of Sarah Palin.
You mean when you define it that way.
Joe Mama #6 – isn’t that redundant ?
Isn’t our David K an archexemplar of the crazy left ?
(innocent smile)
See, Alasdair just proves my point. No rational person would classify my views as “crazy left”. He simply believes that “crazy left” is == doesn’t agree with Bush.
I am well aware that Palin has many detractors even on the right (@PeggyNoonan). My comment did not address or assume anything about the ideological standing of the original tweeter.
I see your point, Joe Mama, but I’d counter with a hypothetical.
Suppose I’m a small-time associate attorney at a law firm in Denver, CO and have generally received glowing reviews, but then suddenly out of nowhere my name has popped up as a potential appointee working directly for the state attorney general. Now fully on their radar screen, my ideological enemies find everything I am working on and torpedo all my cases by sending elite lawyers to support my legal opponents, fully funding them, and filing counter-suits, motions to dismiss, and every other delay and annoyance tactic in the book. In disgust, I quit in the hopes that my employer and clients’ cases can go forward, even though it’s no sure thing I’ll get that appointment.
In that scenario, would you call me a failure?
In short, you simply can’t tar and feather Palin as a failure for quitting office without taking into account the outside attention and new ambitions suddenly thrust upon her. Once Sarah Palin had national cachet, there was no turning back — small-time Alaska politics would never be the same if she tried to stay in that game.
My comment likewise assumed nothing about the original tweeter (because I misattributed the tweet to Brendan); rather, it was clearly aimed at those speculating about the “real” reason behind Palin’s resignation.
I get your hypothetical, AML, and if the facts surrounding Palin’s resignation are analogous (as they well may be), then perhaps “failure” is an inaccurate description. However, she is only going to have the Andrew Sullivans even farther up her vagina with a microscope if she runs for POTUS, so quitting as governor because she was unable or unwilling to take the heat strikes me as a “failure” insofar as her mettle is concerned.
I don’t understand why Andrew Sullivan would want to be up Sarah Palin’s vagina with a microscope. Now, for the other 99% of males on the planet, I can come up with a theory….