Da Techguy's (no longer backup) Blog

…for republicans unclean on the concept:

It was almost an exact repeat of what happened with Dole in 1996. Republicans never seem to learn: Your best candidate is always the one most hated by liberals.

It’s a very easy one keep that in mind and we will be fine. Nordlinger has a few more things to say about that hated one and Vanity Fair:

I’ve read the little blurb that precedes the piece. Actually, I’ve read just part of the opening sentence of that blurb.

The sentence begins, “Despite her disastrous performance in the 2008 election, Sarah Palin . . .”

Okay, was it? Was Palin’s performance disastrous? There were bad moments and incidents, to be sure — particularly the Katie Couric interview, as I recall. (I thought that the Charles Gibson one was not nearly as bad as some other people thought. I also thought that the interview reflected far worse on Gibson than on Palin.) But Palin had some very, very good moments — starting with that boffo, electric acceptance speech. And she was generally good — quite good — on the stump.

Also, consider this: John McCain has had about 3,000 debates on the national stage, running for president all those years. Palin has had exactly one. Who did better: the GOP presidential nominee, in his three debates last fall, or the vice-presidential nominee in her one — in her maiden effort?

Palin in NH 2008 Photo DaTechguy

You know I watched a lot of the Palin events on TV and attended one myself with my youngest son. I was even interviewed by the BBC concerning her at the Dover rally. Anyone who actually saw this woman in action knows what kind of candidate she was and would be. In my opinion she would be an even better leader.

This administration knows how things will be in 4 years. The media and the democrats know how they will be in 4 years.

Colbert joked yesterday about the second coming of Reagan in 2012. The Washington Post talks about a Clinton like rebound. If Sarah Palin is the nominee she will not be the 2nd coming of Ronald Reagan, she will be the first coming of Sarah Palin and that will be even better.

Update: Since this is way down the list as update 5 on this post i’m including here since the Anchoress take is not to be missed.

Considering the absolute fits the media have concerning her, particularly Andrew Sullivan (for whom blogger Alzheimer’s aka Sullivan’s Syndrome is named) there in my opinion to sources for this.

The first and most obvious is fear. If Sarah Palin was the hack and the idiot that Sullivan, vanity fair and Morning Joe (except for Mika) pretend she is they would not be constantly on the attack?

Her brand of fiscal conservatism and common sense is the absolute antithesis of the current administration. This is recognized by the Obama administration, its MSM enablers (and potential 2012 republican opponents) Thus she must be destroyed and destroyed quickly. If she is allowed to become the voice of opposition to Obama then 2010 then the administration will be deprived of what it most wants; a stuffy white male as this president opposition.

The second thing is actually more primal and Pundit and Pundette almost has it. Sarah Palin is the living embodiment of not only conservative but traditional pre-Vietnam American values. Her family could be dropped into the 1940’s or 1950’s and would fit in perfectly, a manly husband, a strong wife with many children one who is serving overseas during wartime. Strong believers in God, Hunting, fishing and loving their children even when they make foolish mistakes.

At the same time she is the ultimate modern woman, THE feminist example. She is clearly as strong as her husband yet doesn’t emasculate him. She has one of the most responsible jobs in the country , she is a powerful woman sure of herself and sure of her decisions. She leads and she fights She is exactly the type of woman that liberals have dreamed of for years…

…yet she rejects liberalism and its sacrament of abortion, she rejects victimhood as her means of advancement preferring merit. Her very existence makes a lie of much of the left’s orthodoxy. I know grown men who hate her for what she is. Those same men get along with me even though I have similar views on most issues with her but they hate her with a passion so unbridled that it boarders on mania.

She is both an example and a rallying point for the many who believe in those values that she stands for because she lives them. She destroys the happy constructs of reality that sustain her foes. Like a vampire before the crucifix they can’t bear the sight. For them to continue she must be destroyed.

I don’t think they will succeed.

Update: Jim Geraghey and Hugh Hewlett come too the same conclusions a few hours later in front of a much larger audience. He expands on my point as follows:

Today almost everyone faces some sort of challenge in balancing work and family; I don’t know too many people who believe there are sufficient hours in a day. And then along comes this woman who’s made all of these “conservative” choices and now has an amazing career, a supportive husband, a beautiful family, and great health and appearance, and she bears it all, including the inevitable hard times, with pluck and a smile, as far as we can tell. (For all we know, perhaps behind closed doors, Sarah Palin screams into a pillow when it all gets to be too much. But what we know about her suggests she relieves her stress by shooting moose.)

Yup that’s it.

Update 2: Allahpundit and Krauthammer disagree. They’re smart guys but they’re wrong.

Update 3: Not surprisingly Joe Russo at conservatives 4 Palin gets it.

Apparently, Krauthammer doesn’t like candidates who speak in simple language — like this:

On the Foreign Policy:
“We win, they lose.”

On American values:
“All great change in America begins at the dinner table.”

On Economics:
“Government does not solve problems; it subsidizes them.”

That Reagan guy was just not a “serious candidate” for the presidency. It is clear from Krauthammer’s takes on Palin, when the subject comes up on the panel, that he doesn’t follow her career at all.

Bingo!

Update 4: More here

Update 5: The Anchoress is even better on this with this truth:

The truth is, if Sarah Palin had a “D” after her name, instead of an “R”, they’d adore her, and they would be falling all over themselves to showcase her as “the successful product of feminism and the opportunities provided by progressivism!” Hell, they’d even tolerate her having allowed Trig to live, as they could then prop her up as a “big tent, pro-choice Democrat, and you know, a Christian…ist…no, she’s an Evangelica Christian! And that’s…okay!”

Yowsa!