Sarah Palin Backs Paul Ryan's "Roadmap"

Sarah Palin's plans to eventually run for the Republican presidential nomination were reinforced with her Wall Street Journal editorial on December 10th endorsing Wisconsin Republican Representative Paul Ryan's Roadmap for America's Future.

By contrasting Ryan's Roadmap with the recent Bowles-Simpson Commission's recommendations, Palin hopes to demonstrate an appreciation for the policy nuances contained in both, as well as re-stating her conservative bona fides.

The difference between the two plans is fundamentally ideological. The former attempts to square the deficit circle by jiggering various details of existing programs- social spending and taxation- while Ryan engages in wholesale programmatic changes to provide for more individual responsibility and less borrowing and federal spending.

In fact, Palin does many a service by concisely and clearly re-stating Ryan's recommendations in just a few paragraphs. In doing so, she allies herself with those calling for an overhaul of federal social programs which exhibit such poor, 1930's era design. I've written about this in prior posts.

Social Security is surely one of the most poorly-designed old-age insurance schemes ever. It contains no total spending constraints, employs a single communal pot of so-called assets from which to play uncapped, unlimited claims, and featured no conditional payout changes based on the forecasted financial solvency and sustainability of the program.

This insane model was then carbon-copied for Medicare and Medicaid, when all three could just as easily have been designed as personal, portable defined-contribution schemes.

There's much about Palin that I don't trust in the context of her being president. But her clear-cut explication of Ryan's plan, and solid support of it probably helps the overall GOP presidential primary campaign environment by challenging other candidates to match her unequivocal endorsement of Ryan's Roadmap.

Incredible Leaking of Palin's Speaking Contract

Here's some of the text of a recent online news piece on how Sarah Palin's confidential speaking engagement contract with a Cal State campus was discovered,

"Brown's investigation was prompted, in part, by a group of CSU Stanislaus students who retrieved five pages of the contract from a campus trash bin last Friday after hearing administrators were engaged in shredding documents.

The contract detailed the former Alaska governor's requirements for her visit, including first-class flights from Anchorage to California — if she flies commercial. If not, "the private aircraft MUST BE a Lear 60 or larger ...," the contract specifies.

Palin also must be provided with a suite and two single rooms in a deluxe hotel near the campus in Turlock in the Central Valley. During her speech, her lectern must be stocked with two water bottles and bendable straws.

The students who found the contract document said they acted on a tip that documents were being shredded at the campus administration building on a day when staff members were supposed to be on furlough.

Alicia Lewis, 26, was one of the students who went to investigate. The building was locked and gated, but the students were able to retrieve piles of paperwork, including the contract document, from a nearby trash bin, Lewis said.

Russell Giambelluca, the university's vice president of business and finance, said Tuesday that no one at the university was advised to destroy specific foundation documents, and staff members routinely shred and dispose of paperwork that is no longer needed.

Regarding the excerpt of Palin's contract, he said: "I find it interesting that among shredded documents you find one that's completely intact related to the contract."

Lewis and another student, Ashli Briggs, traveled to Sacramento Tuesday to give Brown office material they said had been thrown out, including two boxes of documents and two trash bags filled with shredded files."

Funny, isn't it? Giambelluca's observation shows just how much venality and hatred exists against Palin on the left. That, among otherwise shredded documents, Palin's contract mysteriously turned up unshredded and available for theft and publication.

Were a liberal like, say, Al Gore subjected to this sort of treatment, the state's AG, a Democrat running for Governor- again- would probably be conducting an on-campus investigation to nab the guilty student or bureaucrat.

Sarah Palin For President?

Dorothy Rabinowitz, a member of the Wall Street Journal editorial board, wrote an excellent piece in last Thursday's edition of the paper commenting on Sarah Palin's presidential aspirations.

Rabinowitz chose to focus on Palin's playing the victim role, and how that sets her apart from Reagan's legacy. A legacy she seems to believe she follows, and in which she believes she partakes.

I found other reasons to question Palin's fitness for the office, while discussing the topic with a friend recently.

With the visceral memory of presidents back to Johnson, several things bother me about Sarah Palin.

First is that she was governor of a relatively small state, in terms of population. The state has less than a million residents.

After voting for a man who was possibly our worst president ever, Jimmy Carter, and watching him become impotent within months of his inauguration, I don't trust small-state governors to be capable of handing our federal government. And certainly not one who failed to complete even one term.

Second, coming from a state so physically distant from areas of high US population, and having few people itself, I question whether Palin has an effective, sizable network of capable, credible advisers.

It's all well and good for her husband, the "First Dude" of Alaska, to be a primary confidant for the state's governor. But I really don't want to know that Sarah Palin would be largely reliant on her husband's advice to govern our nation.

Again, as with Carter, who also possessed an ineffective group of advisers, I am concerned that a group of professional hangers-on from the GOP would fill the void. Even the Journal editorial noted that she has hired some Washington policy guns to brief her and help her fill this important gap in her experience.

That's very troubling. You can well imagine the picture of an inexperienced, under-educated president relying on the advisers who happened to grab her attention first. Hardly like Reagan, who possessed good basic foreign and domestic instincts.

I believe Palin would provide an opportunity for has-been GOP graybeards, and worse, to try to manipulate her.

Many of Palin's core values are laudable and desirable in a president. But, at least at this time, Sarah Palin is simply too unfinished and politically immature to be a credible candidate for president of the US.

Where Next for Sarah Palin?

This week marks the major media rebranding of 2008 GOP VP candidate Sarah Palin. Her own book, "Going Rogue," debuts, with support from a week of New York media appearances, including Oprah Winfrey's and Sean Hannity's programs.

Also carefully timed to this upswell of Palin publicity is Weekly Standard associate editor Matthew Continetti's book, "The Persecution of Sarah Palin."

What will all of this coordinated, concerted attention accomplish?

Probably not that much.

I read a friendly review of Palin's book in the Wall Street Journal this week, and it didn't exactly make me want to buy her book. The all-important 'next steps' chapter in the book was panned as a tepid campaign speech, full of platitudes but short of detail.

There's no getting by the reality that Palin's resignation as governor of Alaska prior to completing her term is a serious liability.

Fox News contributor and noted conservative columnist Mary Katherine Ham opined, on Bill O'Reilly's program, that Palin probably needs to win a House or Senate election in order to demonstrate some commitment to actually learning and grappling with federal-level issues, as well as provide some stability and length to her now-brief record of holding an important governing office.

Ham may be correct, but, unfortunately, two out of three of Alaska's Congressional delegation are already Republican, and the third, Mark Begich, just won election last year to Ted Stevens' seat.

So, there's really no room for Palin on that front.

Despite the many polls suggesting that Palin could improve her image and standing among independent voters, I personally just don't think Sarah Palin has the necessary experience to be seen as qualified for the 2012 presidential election cycle.

Yes, her values are solidly conservative. Yes, she has some valuable experience and perspectives on energy and environmental issues.

But having just suffered through one inexperienced president, it's unlikely Wonderboy's successful GOP opponent will be an equally-inexperienced candidate.

More probably, like Jeb Bush, Sarah Palin, in order to realize any presidential hopes, will have to be patient, take a longer, circuitous path, and win a nomination for election to the White House in something more like 7 or 11 years, rather than 3. And that means she has to find a worthy base from which to operate in the meantime, doing genuinely productive work while remaining close to, and occasionally, but not frequently, in the national political spotlight.

David Letterman's Coming Revelations

I chanced to see some of Fox News' Geraldo Rivera's program over the weekend. Typically, I can't stand Geraldo. But I was more or less semi-comatose when the program came on, recovering from a daunting, hilly afternoon bicycle ride.

The program's guest was Gerald Shargel, the attorney for alleged David Letterman extortionist, Joe Holderman. I can't recall his name, but he was apparently the guy who gave convicted mobster John Gotti the moniker "teflon don."

This New York Post article hints at what is in store for the gap-toothed late night talk show host. Shargel's attitude on Sunday evening was a great deal more promising than even that article could capture.

Among Shargel's hints were that Letterman seems to have indulged in a massive illusion by way of confession, in order to draw attention away from the identities of the people with whom he had sex. And Shargel said, over and over, that he believes, from what he has seen, that the key to Letterman's behavior are the identities of the people with whom he has had sex. Shargel didn't mention gender, so it could be many possibilities, any or all of which could turn people against Letterman.

Shargel was really adamnant that, having reviewed the evidence thus far, he is pretty sure there's quite a bit more to this story than what Letterman carefully released on his show. For example, Shargel asked, why did Letterman's attorney only wear a wire to the last meeting with Shargel, and not all of them? What was said in the prior meetings that Letterman and his lawyer did not want on tape?

Now, all of this is in the offing, and really not about politics. Yet.

But as I heard Letterman's latest confession about what one does when one hurts someone, and how much "work" he has "cut out" for himself to regain the good graces of his wife, I cannot help recalling the comedian's vicious attacks on Sarah Palin.

Letterman sure was happy to be a liberal attack dog when he was devoid of any sins. It's easy to rip into others and make fun of them when you seem unassailable.

And, in the opening days of the Letterman case, this seemed to continue to be true. Letterman easily deflected his sexual infidelities, winking and interspersing his confessions with laugh lines, the better to try to insinuate that everybody does this.

Karma has a funny way of calling in unexpected ways. I think Letterman is about to discover this.

It could well be that all the invective and bile which he spewed at and over Palin and her family is about to be revisited upon him tenfold.

Justice can be quite impartial at times. Especially when it's not the variety that comes from a court verdict, but, instead, the process of being put through public scrutiny attendant upon a court case.

Sarah Palin's Resignation

What a wacky end to a wild ride in the national public eye for Sarah Palin.

As the most popular sitting governor of any state at the time of her selection for VP on McCain's presidential ticket, Palin had many desirable and impressive attributes.

Sadly, things seemed to have gone downhill from there for her. First she was badly-handled by McCain's staffers. Then the outlandish, false rumors started regarding her wardrobe and spending on her preparation for the late summer's campaign.

But perhaps the most egregious consequence of her sudden fame was a tidal wave of anger by liberals who could offer no objective reasons for hating her. I personally have several female liberal Democratic acquaintances who simply sputter and physical go into contortions when Palin's name is mentioned, but can offer no sane explanation for their reactions. They typically criticize Palin's mannerisms, eye-glasses or the state of Alaska.

I'm sure much of this liberal female- and male- rancor is based upon Palin's simple story of a rise to power through competence, likability and normalcy. She's a beautiful woman with a nice husband, both are athletic, and Palin didn't attend an Ivy League university or become a lawyer.

In contrast, Hilary Clinton is, at best, physically plain, a lawyer with no record of any important political accomplishment. She's rather bland compared to Palin's genuine excitement, multi-dimensional life and accomplishments and approach to the electorate.

Despite the confusing currents surrounding Palin's national rise and, now, departure from office, I have a few thoughts on her recent actions and near term prospects.

Like Karl Rove, I also think that Sarah Palin is pretty far from ready for the prime time, national stage of Republican politics. Being VP on a losing ticket is miles away from genuine contention for the top spot in November of 2012. For Palin, I suspect the rapid rise to national prominence has caused her to feel she's better-positions and -prepared for national campaigning than she really is.

Judging by her comments, Palin is largely focused on values and perceived splits in the Republican party, particularly between entrenched party operatives and more conservative voters who are often registered as independents.

While I always give governors the edge over Senators in presidential races, Palin does hail from a small state, and now has failed to complete even one term.

If you recall, Jimmy Carter was similarly from a small state. He, too sounded high moral values and populist themes, only to prove, once in office, that his cracker state background was simply not up to performing well as president.

I didn't give Palin much of a chance at a 2012 nomination even if she had remained governor. Now, I think it will be nearly impossible. Give her credit for heading off the continuing stress of running a distant state while trying to spend time and attention on national issues. Evidently, Alaskans were already growing weary of her obvious attempt to keep her hand in national politics.

There's another side to Palin's resignation, though, that troubles me. It seems that, like George W. Bush, she had productive relationships with Democrats in her state's legislature, until her rise to McCain's ticket.

Somehow, it seems that Alaskan Democrats became obligated to tear Palin apart every chance they got, and suddenly become contentious. The people of Alaska clearly haven't been well-served by these Democratic antics.

Is it now the case that opposition parties to a sitting governor must go negative as soon as that governor gets national attention and is touted as a presidential candidate?

What happened to state pride and some sort of bi-partisanship to actually make government- whether state or federal- work?

Palin's resignation gives one cause to worry about the divisive, damaging role our political parties seem to play toward any politician from the opposing party who has demonstrated competence, performance and genuine success in serving their electorate.

John Kerry's Senate Stand-Up Comedy Gig

Evidently, Massachusetts liberal Democratic Senator John Kerry thinks he's a stand-up comic.



He recently got into the act, belatedly, of Sarah Palin-bashing. The occasion was South Carolina Mark Sanford's disappearance last week, while visiting his mistress in Argentina.



Kerry asked why the missing Republican governor couldn't have been Palin?



As usual, Kerry's leaden, out-of-touch sense played poorly in the media, once again bringing embarrassment and disgrace on himself and his state.

What is it about Sarah Palin that so scares liberals? Is it that few Democratic women are as physically attractive as Palin? Or have risen to high elective office without a degree from Harvard? Or a law degree?


Why doesn't Kerry stick to local topics for his humor? Like his fellow Massachusetts Senator's responsibility for the death of his campaign worker so long ago? For which he was never tried, much less even indicted?

McCain & Palin On CNBC Today

John McCain and Sarah Palin gave a live interview this morning to CNBC's dimwitted on-air personality Maria Bartiromo.


For me, this campaign is about which candidate will do the least long term harm to the country.


It's very clear to me that means John McCain, despite my basic distrust of his conservative credentials and lack of respect for his intellect.


Thus, this morning's interview did not exactly display McCain's greatest strengths. He's really a little fuzzy on detailed economics. Sarah Palin, on the other hand, is razor sharp.


The CNBC on-air head asked the two directly, 'what would you do, if elected, about the country's current financial and economic situation,' or a question to that effect.


What McCain said was not memorable. And, honestly, that's inexcusable. To sit down for a live interview with a self-proclaimed, if not actually competent, business correspondent, on a business entertainment channel, and not have that answer canned and ready, is just jaw-droppingly inexcusable.

Especially at this late date in the campaign.


Instead of McCain's meandering reply, here is how I think he should have responded,


"Maria, I've thought about this question a lot. It's got to be one of the most important ones on the minds of most Americans this fall.

First, let's understand that in America, government does not create lasting, meaningful jobs in a direct fashion. Government sets terms and conditions for how business operates, it manages the money supply and overall environment of laws and regulation.

But we, as a society, must live with our mistakes. Just because the economic and financial aspects of our society became carried away with risk-taking, risky borrowing for unaffordable homes, and spending, does not mean that the same society, through our government, can wave a magic wand and make all the subsequent pain simply vanish.

The best thing that government can do in this situation- and what Sarah Palin and I will do when elected- is to lower taxes and cut non-essential spending while stabilizing the financial system and softening the effects of unavoidable job losses in the coming recession.

Now, I know my opponent is promising all sorts of new spending to solve all of our economic ills. I also know that your network, Maria, is a subsidiary of a very liberal, left-leaning network, NBC, which by its nature expects socialistic and big-government answers from Presidential candidates. Even your network's own 'political correspondent,' John Harwood, is also a writer for the very-liberal New York Times.

So the very nature of your opening question suggests that government must 'do something' to solve our current economic ills.

How can one person- any one person- simply 'solve' an entire society's and culture's dive into the deep end of the pool of risk-taking and financial excess?

It can't.

In fact, your own Congress- Republicans and Democrats, but mostly Democrats- have fostered a culture of risk-taking and entitlement in our federal government that makes it harder for individual citizens to take responsibility for their own actions.

What will Sarah and I do when elected to remedy the nation's economic and financial ills?

In short, we'll focus on our entire society's- government, businesses and individuals- spree of over-spending, reckless opportunism, over-borrowing and dependence upon government assistance.

And I will, although it should have been done in August of last year, sign an executive order modifying 'mark to market' rules so that performing structured securities can be valued for their long term economic potential, rather than at any particular moment's market- or lack thereof- value.

I will also immediately move to close or completely privatize Fannie and Freddie,. I will also sign an executive order suspending the CRA.

Government should not be telling banks which loans to make, nor using taxpayer money to subsidize bad mortgage loans and then securitize them to the rest of the world.

We can't simply spend or regulate our way to a magic, painless solution. But we can- and will- lead our nation to more reasonable, sane and responsible behavior.

Frankly, economies go through booms and busts, growth and recession. That was going to happen even before the current financial crisis first broke into view with the failure of the two Bear Stearns hedge funds in the summer of 2007.

Sarah and I will work to reform and moderate our recent culture of overly-opportunistic behavior, part of which has shown itself in the current economic ills of our nation."

Such an answer would have shown McCain to comprehend the totality of the current mess, while clearly distinguishing himself from his opponent by not promising that he, alone, could somehow fix it and remove all painful consequences of the past few years' mistakes.

Anchorage Daily News Loses Its Mind

You've probably heard, by now, that the Anchorage Daily News endorsed the rookie Senator from Illinois for President.

It's fair to say that this is probably the first time such a small newspaper has been nationally showcased for its Presidential endorsement.

Being that Sarah Palin is the nation's most popular, highly-rated governor of any state in the Union, it bears reading some of the ADN's endorsement text.

Here are some sample paragraphs,

"Sen. Barack Obama, the Democratic nominee, brings far more promise to the office. In a time of grave economic crisis, he displays thoughtful analysis, enlists wise counsel and operates with a cool, steady hand. The same cannot be said of Sen. McCain.

Of the two candidates, Sen. Obama better understands the mortgage meltdown's root causes and has the judgment and intelligence to shape a solution, as well as the leadership to rally the country behind it. It is easy to look at Sen. Obama and see a return to the smart, bipartisan economic policies of the last Democratic administration in Washington, which left the country with the momentum of growth and a budget surplus that President George Bush has squandered.

Gov. Palin has shown the country why she has been so successful in her young political career. Passionate, charismatic and indefatigable, she draws huge crowds and sows excitement in her wake. She has made it clear she's a force to be reckoned with, and you can be sure politicians and political professionals across the country have taken note. Her future, in Alaska and on the national stage, seems certain to be played out in the limelight.

Yet despite her formidable gifts, few who have worked closely with the governor would argue she is truly ready to assume command of the most important, powerful nation on earth. To step in and juggle the demands of an economic meltdown, two deadly wars and a deteriorating climate crisis would stretch the governor beyond her range."

Not once did the editorial endorsing the freshman Democratic Senator provide any reference to his experience, accomplishments, or demonstrated ability to do anything that anyone else with intellect and an education could also do.

He "brings.....promise," "enlists wise counsel," "operates with a cool, steady hand" and allegedly (without substantiation) "better understands" the economic situation.

Really? Promise is just that- promise. No substance. What wise counsel? Joe Biden?

Paul Volcker would undoubtedly aid whomever next occupied the Oval Office, but his current client has shown absolutely no grasp of the current economic dilemma.

The only thing Obama has "operated with a cool, steady hand" is his ever-changing image and stances in his primary and general election campaigns.

How odd that the ADN overlooks its own state's governors actual accomplishments. Both as an oil board member, and governor. Even as a municipal mayor.

If a sitting governor with Palin's experience merits the verdict "few....would argue she is truly ready to assume command of the most important, powerful nation on earth," from the ADN, how can an unaccomplished freshman Senator possibly earn the paper's endorsement?

The ADN's endorsement of the Democratic candidate is just the latest and most egregious example of how people seem to take leave of their senses when expressing their preference for the junior Illinois Senator, and the bases for that preference.

The Baseless Attacks Against Palin

Daniel Henninger of the Wall Street Journal wrote a superb riposte in yesterday's paper to Peggy Noonan's recent castigation of Sarah Palin. His, entitled, "Hatin Palin," reads, in (large) part,


"The abuse being heaped on Sarah Palin is such a cheap shot.

The complaint against the Alaska governor, at its most basic, is that she doesn't qualify for admission to the national political fraternity. Boy, that's rich. Behold the shabby frat house that says it's above her pay grade.


Congress has the lowest approval rating ever registered in the history of polling (12%!).

Sarah Palin didn't design a system of presidential primaries whose length and cost ensures that only the most obsessional personalities will run the gauntlet, while a long list of effective governors don't run.

Out of this process has fallen a Democratic nominee who entered the U.S. Senate in 2005 fresh off a stint in the Illinois state legislature, with next to no record of political accomplishment.

By not bothering to look very deeply at the details beneath either candidate's governing proposals, the media have created a lot of downtime to take free kicks at Gov. Palin. My former colleague, Tunku Varadarajan, has compiled a glossary of Palin invective, and I've added a few: "Republican blow-up doll," "idiot," "Christian Stepford wife," "Jesus freak," "Caribou Barbie," "a dope," "a fatal cancer to the Republican Party," "liar," "a national disgrace" and "her pretense that she is a woman."

If American politics is at low ebb, it is because so many of its observers enjoy working in its fetid backwash.

The primary discomfort with Gov. Palin is the notion that she doesn't have sufficient experience to be president, that Sen. McCain should have picked a Washington hand seasoned in the ways of the world. Such as? Here's an opinion poll question:

If as Joe Biden suggests the U.S. is likely to be tested by a foreign enemy next year, who of the following would you rather have dealing with it in the Oval Office: Nancy (of Damascus) Pelosi, Harry Reid, John Edwards, Joe (the U.S. drove Hezbollah out of Lebanon) Biden, Mike Huckabee, Geraldine Ferraro, Tom DeLay, Jimmy Carter or Sarah Palin?

My pick? Gov. Palin, surely the most grounded, common-sense person on that list of prime-time politicians.

The stoning of Sarah Palin has exposed enough cultural fissures in American politics to occupy strategists full-time until 2012. We now see there is a left-to-right elite centered in New York, Washington, Hollywood and Silicon Valley who hand down judgments of the nation's mortals from their perch atop the Bell Curve.

It seems only yesterday that the most critical skill in presidential politics was being able to connect to people in places like Bronko's bar or Saddleback Church. When Gov. Palin showed she excelled at that, the goal posts suddenly moved and the new game was being able to talk the talk in London, Paris, Tehran or Moscow. She looks about a half-step behind Sen. Obama on that learning curve.

Lorne Michaels, the executive producer of "Saturday Night Live," lives on the forward wave of American life. This week he gave his view of Sarah Palin to EW.com:


"I think Palin will continue to be underestimated for a while. I watched the way she connected with people, and she's powerful. Her politics aren't my politics. But you can see that she's a very powerful, very disciplined, incredibly gracious woman. This was her first time out and she's had a huge impact. People connect to her." "


I agree with Henninger. Palin is fresh and exciting precisely because she's from outside the usual band of Beltway morons. Blowhards, windbags and too-long-in-place Senators. Or too green, but vetted for their attitude, rather than their accomplishments.

This woman is the single most popular sitting Governor in our 50 states!

The viciousness of the attacks against her tell you how dangerous she is to both Democrats and business-as-usual Republicans.

I find it insightful that someone so successful in the entertainment field, Lorne Michaels, notices her social skills and 'ability to connect.' You have to remember how badly someone from outside the entertainment industry can bomb on a live program like SNL. She performed like she'd done it all her life!

Thanks to Henninger's piece, we can see more clearly how, now, Noonan is part of the national political problem, and no longer part of the fresh solution of the Reagan era, now nearly 30 years ago.

Peggy Noonan's Latest Blathering

Peggy Noonan has, I think, finally gone around the bend and become completely irrelevant. Her column in this weekend's Wall Street Journal demonstrated, for anyone still in doubt, how entrenched and narrow-minded she has become as a Washington insider, in perspective, if not geographically.

Among the nastier passages regarding Sarah Palin, the focus of her "Palin's Failin'" editorial, are these,

"There has never been a second's debate among liberals, to use an old-fashioned word that may yet return to vogue, over Mrs. Palin: She was a dope and unqualified from the start. Conservatives and Republicans, on the other hand, continue to battle it out: Was her choice a success or a disaster? And if one holds negative views, should one say so? For conservatives in general, but certainly for writers, the answer is a variation on Edmund Burke: You owe your readers not your industry only but your judgment, and you betray instead of serve them if you sacrifice it to what may or may not be their opinion.

But we have seen Mrs. Palin on the national stage for seven weeks now, and there is little sign that she has the tools, the equipment, the knowledge or the philosophical grounding one hopes for, and expects, in a holder of high office. She is a person of great ambition, but the question remains: What is the purpose of the ambition?

Her supporters accuse her critics of snobbery: Maybe she's not a big "egghead" but she has brilliant instincts and inner toughness. But what instincts?

In the end the Palin candidacy is a symptom and expression of a new vulgarization in American politics. It's no good, not for conservatism and not for the country. And yes, it is a mark against John McCain, against his judgment and idealism."

In my opinion, Noonan is simply off her rocker. Why Noonan wrote glowingly of Harry Truman, but savages the equally-unknown and inexpressive Palin is beyond me. Except, of course, if you simply write Noonan off as a beltway veteran.

And I do.

After all, nobod knew who Truman was upon his nomination. Roosevelt never even spoke with him personally. Truman's only managerial experience was his failed clothing store in Kansas City.

How else to explain her preference for that idiot, "Lying Joe" Biden, over Palin, as a potential President?

Biden has been a wrong-headed moron with too many years in our temple to Windbaggery, the US Senate. He's done nothing.

Palin has been an executive of real governments. One municipal, one state. Hard work, if you want it.

In case Noonan has forgotten, Vice-Presidents are typically chosen for a reason other than being qualified to be President. Like it or not, that's the truth.

The first reason is typically to attract a key segment of the voting population which eludes the Presidential candidate. The next reason would be some particular theme, as in Palin's case.

Noonan simply dismisses anything outside the Beltway now. Even the freshman Senator from Illinois is okay with her, evidently because he stumbled into a Senate seat only two years ago.

How can anyone criticize Palin as unfit to be President, yet give the Illinois rookie a pass?

This, alone, I contend, marks Noonan as a washed-up has been in business of political commentary. If she's not biased, then she's just lost all perspective, judgment and common sense.

What Sarah Palin Needs To Do In Her VP Debate

I saw an extensive interview this afternoon on Fox News with Geraldine Ferraro. Aside from cramming her partisan views on this election into her closing remarks, I found Ferraro to be dead wrong in her assessment of the situation confronting Sarah Palin.

Simply put, one cannot be what one is not. Sarah Palin cannot, and should not, attempt to become a policy wonk for tomorrow evening's debate in Saint Louis.

Ferraro all but chastised Palin for having no grasp of the 'big issues,' the 'Federal issues' with which she must grapple, both in the debate and in the office of President, should she rise to that. Then Ferraro laughably argued that Lying Joe Biden has 'experience' as a long-serving Senator.

I disagree. Emphatically.

What Sarah Palin brings to the table is an intelligent, well-educated American's view of many important issues confronting our government and nation. This isn't somehow wiped out simply because she is running for VP on McCain's ticket.

Ferraro's comments displayed her typical politician's disdain for the lower class whom she represented. Those silly voters who just don't know anything, until Geraldine would tell them how to think.

Palin is from the opposite end of the spectrum. Unlike Ferraro, the product of Democratic machine politics in New York City, Palin ran against and toppled Alaska's corrupt state government and the GOP leaders who fostered the corruption.

Sarah Palin is the quintessential citizen governor and representative.

Thus, to me, it seems simple. Palin ought not try to train in only a few weeks to sound like a Senator. Instead, she should simply become acquainted with what the issues are. From there, any intelligent, educated American can form reasonably cogent views in a matter of days. Usually, Washington politicians make these things out to be far more difficult and intractable than they really are.

What Sarah Palin should emphasize, to Biden's disadvantage, is her real and formidable experience as a sitting chief executive. Like most Senators, including, regrettably, McCain, Biden has never managed or been a responsible executive of anything.

Sarah Palin has, and is. She should drive that home with fierce determination. Biden is less qualified to be President than Palin simply on the basis that he has no executive experience. None.

If Palin's handlers recognize this, they will facilitate her scoring a clear victory over Biden in tomorrow night's debate.

By responding to 'the usual issues' in Washington as a thoughtful, intelligent outsider, while reminding everyone that she has executive experience, while Biden has none, Sarah Palin can win that debate simply by being herself.

For her to be otherwise will be to play the Washington insider game, and, thus, invite disaster.

Donny Deutsch on Sarah Palin

I saw this segment live last week on CNBC. Donny Deutsch, ad agency maven, speaks about Sarah Palin's raw, primal, sexual allure.

The reason I found this so interesting is that, when I happened to catch the audio in the room next to my office, and walked in to watch the segment, I was fully prepared for the extent of Donny's remarks.

Having been a marketing student in both undergraduate and graduate school, I am well aware of the sociological and psychological bases of many marketing and advertising themes and propositions.

In fact, Donny directly and explicitly addressed the sexual component of Sarah Palin's appeal that Erin Burnett only referred to obliquely, using the first and last letters of the acronym MILF.

But I was not at all surprised that Deutsch described Palin as a 'seminal moment' in American politics. Further, he finally explained, without mentioning her, why Hillary was unable to leverage her gender.

She's simply not attractive. And if a woman is going to be powerful, female, and successful in politics, she needs to be both of the first two. Hillary adopted male trappings.

Sarah Palin is unabashedly running as an attractive uber-woman. Physically attractive, organizationally powerful, professionally successful and a mother, too.

I love the fact that Deutsch, simply following his professional instincts and nature, addressed all the themes present in Sarah Palin's attractiveness without flinching, hiding anything, nor beating around the bush.

Sarah Palin's Acceptance Speech

Sarah Palin's acceptance speech of two evenings ago was a tremendous success. That's evident, and no news at all at this point.

What is news, though, is the reaction of the freshman Senator from Illinois.

After spending the bulk of the past 19 months campaigning on style, race and personality, the rookie Senator cum Democratic party Presidential candidate now criticizes Sarah Palin's speech as being lacking in substance.

Obama cried foul because she didn't mention his Illinois state legislature (ine)experience. He should be thankful she didn't focus more attention on his do-nothing career as a part-time legislator.

But it's far richer irony that the Presidential candidate who hides behind race, inexperience and an arrogant attitude, preaching merely 'change,' without admitting to the destructive consequences of his promised programmatic solutions to all of our nation's supposed ills, would complain that Palin didn't provide details of The McCain/Palin ticket's approach to governing the US.

One thing is very clear. Obama and his hapless running mate are now running scared.

Sarah Palin displayed a panache and appeal two nights ago that nobody expected. Her crowd appeal and magnetism is the equal of, if far different from, the Black Adder's own mesmerizing prose and delivery.

But you can bet that Obama's campaign didn't expect anything like the electrifying, enormously likable and telegenic personality that McCain picked as his running mate.

Obama knows that, secretly, quite a few Reagan Democrat and independent women are doing the math and realizing that the chances of Sarah Palin either succeeding McCain during his first term, or running for his job in 2012, are higher than average.

McCain's body took a tremendous amount of abuse in captivity. Whatever you may think of his skill and fortitude, the Presidency is a very weighty job. Everyone who has held the office looks far more aged on the way out.

Either way, Sarah Palin has a fairly high probability of running for President in 2012 if she and McCain win this election. And women everywhere know this.

Obama and Hillary both campaigned heavily on their minority status- one racial, the other politically-contexted gender. Now, of course, their party's pundits and the media which backs them decries the same sort of single-issue voter intent for Palin that they banked on for Hillary or Obama.

Yes, the left is now more scared than before of Sarah Palin. And John McCain's suddenly-brighter chances at gaining the Oval Office come January.

The Liberal Media Attempts To Crucify Sarah Palin

In the scant few days since Sarah Palin was announced as John McCain's VP choice for the Republican party Presidential ticket, the liberal media has exploded in an orgy of outrage that conservatives would dare to nominate a woman to the GOP ticket.

Rather than celebrate Palin's multi-tasking accomplishments as wife, mother and governor of Alaska, as they unquestionably would, the liberal media is now questioning whether the mother of a Down's syndrome infant can effectively serve as VP.

Rather than focus on Palin's accomplishments in moving up the governing ladder in Alaska, while unseating corrupt Republican politicians and elected office-holders, they castigate her for being so, well, normal.

Maybe what the left meant when they celebrated Hillary Clinton's candidacy was that only elitist women from prominent East Coast colleges, with law degrees and Washington pedigrees, are acceptable female candidates for our nation's highest offices.

Working her way up as mayor of her hometown, then governor of her home state, as Sarah Palin has, is not acceptable in the liberal Democratic playbook. It simply doesn't count.

Like the rookie Illinois Senator, style and form are infinitely more important than the fact that you haven't actually accomplished anything while in the public sector. Neither Obama nor Hillary have actually made a difference to Americans with their work in the Senate. The freshman from Illinois didn't do much for his state's citizens, either. Nor for his constituents in the manner of protecting them from the graft and corruption of the Chicago machine which he tolerated and accommodated.

Seeing an actual example of a successful woman in government, the liberal media is simply enraged that she is Republican, a reformer, and possessing a fairly normal life and family.

It's as if, though they won't actually print or say this, the liberal and their media lapdogs mean,

"How can a non-elitist woman from a state outside the lower 48, i.e., a bumpkin from the hinterlands, possibly be a serious candidate for VP, and, if necessary, ready to be President?

As Dick Armey said on CNBC this morning, I'd take a two-year sitting governor and former town mayor over a windbage Senator- or two- any day.

It takes a lot of skill to successfully operate a city as mayor. Governors have to make things work. They can't get away with merely punching in on the Senate floor, making a few speeches for the cameras, and ducking off to fundraisers. And maybe, occasionally, even showing up to vote on typically dead-end legislation.

In my opinion, the outraged squawking you hear from the liberal Democrats and their media allies are evidence of just how good Sarah Palin is as McCain's choice for VP. I think the liberals are running scared. Very scared.

That women might vote for another women, regardless of party. When it was Hillary, that was okay. Now, with Palin, it's not.

That independent and swing Democrat voters might vote for a proven reformer with a track record of accomplishments in real governing jobs, rather than a freshman windbag Senator.

Yes, the noise you hear in the media is of anguish and fear. They rightly worry that McCain has outmaneuvered Obama in selecting a much more competent, experienced and capable running mate than "Lying Joe" Biden.

One that will actually attract more voters to his ticket in November.