Comments on: Sarahcuda Unbound http://www.jennqpublic.com/sarahcuda-unbound/ one part reason, two parts awesome Thu, 15 Dec 2011 21:43:03 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1.2 By: Howard http://www.jennqpublic.com/sarahcuda-unbound/comment-page-1/#comment-11961 Howard Mon, 26 Jul 2010 18:47:05 +0000 http://www.jennqpublic.com/?p=1404#comment-11961 I know this is a year late- but I just found this and had to comment. What a bunch of apologists. Had this been a female democratic governor stepping down midway through her term, you'd have been all over her as a quitter, weak-willed, having given in to 'partisan political attacks', setting a terrible example for women everywhere, unable to work her way thru a tough situation - the list could go on and on. Or you would have stated that she deserved to go, the damage all this had done to her reputation was damaging to the State and there was no way she could have governed any longer, and she was ethically compromised, we could no longer take her at face value any longer. Instead we get a litany of excuses, she was ethically tarnished- but she is ethical and we can definitely believe her.She can handle tough situations- but in this case she shows she is tougher by quitting, because she refused to play the game. Or my favorite, the martyr syndrome- political strategists will have to think twice about bringing a politician to their knees and making them quit, lest they become the martyr, and are now unrestrained by the formality of office. This last one is another way of saying that she had become politically irrelevant and that she cared more about herself and her own personal aspirations than she did her own state. She's selfish! And her way of continuing to be politically relevant is thru gorilla tactics. Go on Facebook, make her political statements and then show up only at carefully selected politically friendly events or on politically friendly shows/networks. You may argue that the "hateful liberal media" completely trashes her reputation and by continuing to stick around she somehow shows how strong she is, but essentially by sticking to the above strategy, she has isolated herself. She doesn't have to answer to any of her detractors. Oh I know, she does answer, on Facebook, Fox News or at a Tea Party convention, but again this is all friendly territory, where no one will actually ask her to explain or rationalize any of her positions. This is not strong. Strategically it may be smart,it's working, shes still relevant, but if this were a battlefield situation, we would think it cowardly. I know this is a year late- but I just found this and had to comment.
What a bunch of apologists. Had this been a female democratic governor stepping down midway through her term, you’d have been all over her as a quitter, weak-willed, having given in to ‘partisan political attacks’, setting a terrible example for women everywhere, unable to work her way thru a tough situation – the list could go on and on. Or you would have stated that she deserved to go, the damage all this had done to her reputation was damaging to the State and there was no way she could have governed any longer, and she was ethically compromised, we could no longer take her at face value any longer. Instead we get a litany of excuses, she was ethically tarnished- but she is ethical and we can definitely believe her.She can handle tough situations- but in this case she shows she is tougher by quitting, because she refused to play the game. Or my favorite, the martyr syndrome- political strategists will have to think twice about bringing a politician to their knees and making them quit, lest they become the martyr, and are now unrestrained by the formality of office.
This last one is another way of saying that she had become politically irrelevant and that she cared more about herself and her own personal aspirations than she did her own state. She’s selfish!
And her way of continuing to be politically relevant is thru gorilla tactics. Go on Facebook, make her political statements and then show up only at carefully selected politically friendly events or on politically friendly shows/networks. You may argue that the “hateful liberal media” completely trashes her reputation and by continuing to stick around she somehow shows how strong she is, but essentially by sticking to the above strategy, she has isolated herself. She doesn’t have to answer to any of her detractors.
Oh I know, she does answer, on Facebook, Fox News or at a Tea Party convention, but again this is all friendly territory, where no one will actually ask her to explain or rationalize any of her positions. This is not strong. Strategically it may be smart,it’s working, shes still relevant, but if this were a battlefield situation, we would think it cowardly.

]]> By: boldandbald http://www.jennqpublic.com/sarahcuda-unbound/comment-page-1/#comment-4990 boldandbald Tue, 14 Jul 2009 15:45:02 +0000 http://www.jennqpublic.com/?p=1404#comment-4990 The thing I find very interesting is that no one in the media seems to be willing to take what she said when she resigned at face value. ~She couldn't possibly be doing this because she feels that it is in the best interest of the state of Alaska and it's people. There must be some sort of ulterior motive.~ They are just so used to dealing with the typical politician that they can't bring themselves to actually believe what someone says. I think the media response says a lot more about them and the usual politicians that they cover, than it does about Sarah Palin. The thing I find very interesting is that no one in the media seems to be willing to take what she said when she resigned at face value. ~She couldn’t possibly be doing this because she feels that it is in the best interest of the state of Alaska and it’s people. There must be some sort of ulterior motive.~ They are just so used to dealing with the typical politician that they can’t bring themselves to actually believe what someone says. I think the media response says a lot more about them and the usual politicians that they cover, than it does about Sarah Palin.

]]> By: Julie http://www.jennqpublic.com/sarahcuda-unbound/comment-page-1/#comment-4843 Julie Sat, 11 Jul 2009 17:11:27 +0000 http://www.jennqpublic.com/?p=1404#comment-4843 It just amazes me how many women are so insecure that they would attack an honest, hardworking, intelligent women justs to make them feel better above themselves. I thought we wanted honest, straight talking politicans. When we get one we degrade, mock and ridicule. We deserve the politicans we get. I also agree with the statement up above - alot of our politicans should be resigning. Why aren't the people going after Sarah Palin going after these corrupt politicans? It just amazes me how many women are so insecure that they would attack an honest, hardworking, intelligent women justs to make them feel better above themselves. I thought we wanted honest, straight talking politicans. When we get one we degrade, mock and ridicule. We deserve the politicans we get. I also agree with the statement up above – alot of our politicans should be resigning. Why aren’t the people going after Sarah Palin going after these corrupt politicans?

]]> By: Jenn Q. Public http://www.jennqpublic.com/sarahcuda-unbound/comment-page-1/#comment-4737 Jenn Q. Public Thu, 09 Jul 2009 22:26:37 +0000 http://www.jennqpublic.com/?p=1404#comment-4737 As always, ER, I appreciate your interest in being intellectually honest. Too many of Sarah Palin's critics on the left are happy to knowingly spread outrageous lies to accomplish their goal of destroying her. Re: the Branchflower report, the Alaska State Personnel Board (the entity actually empowered by the state constitution to enforce ethics laws) later exonerated Palin. It was found that Branchflower used the wrong state law as the basis for his findings and that Palin did not violate ethics laws in this situation. But the political damage had already been done, and of course, that was precisely the point. And just in case any of the deranged left are reading, Sarah Palin is pro-contraception, didn't make rape survivors pay for rape kits, and doesn't support abstinence-only sex education. I can completely understand why you wouldn't be interested in hearing about Sarah Palin until 2011. I wish I didn't have to constantly hear about the guy the Dems are running in 2012. :-) If I had to guess right now, I'd say Palin is looking at 2020. I think she'll try to rack up political IOUs by supporting another candidate in 2012. If that candidate wins, she'll angle for a position in the administration, possibly energy secretary, and she'll run when that President's term is coming to a close. (This speculation is obviously just for fun since we can't possibly know the factors that will come into play.) I also think it's entirely possible she will relish her role as a free agent in conservative politics, and will spend the rest of her career using her considerable fundraising power to help bankroll conservative candidates. I don't have a horse in the 2012 race yet because too much remains to be seen. Where does Palin stand on immigration? Will Hunstman be a viable candidate? Who else will emerge as a possible contender? At any rate, people on the right who count Palin out are failing to recognize her history of unconventional strategy, her staying power, and yes, her cult of personality. People on the left are making a grave error if they think she won't continue to be a huge force in American politics. Love her or hate her, she's not fading into the wallpaper any time soon. As always, ER, I appreciate your interest in being intellectually honest. Too many of Sarah Palin’s critics on the left are happy to knowingly spread outrageous lies to accomplish their goal of destroying her.

Re: the Branchflower report, the Alaska State Personnel Board (the entity actually empowered by the state constitution to enforce ethics laws) later exonerated Palin. It was found that Branchflower used the wrong state law as the basis for his findings and that Palin did not violate ethics laws in this situation. But the political damage had already been done, and of course, that was precisely the point.

And just in case any of the deranged left are reading, Sarah Palin is pro-contraception, didn’t make rape survivors pay for rape kits, and doesn’t support abstinence-only sex education.

I can completely understand why you wouldn’t be interested in hearing about Sarah Palin until 2011. I wish I didn’t have to constantly hear about the guy the Dems are running in 2012. :-)

If I had to guess right now, I’d say Palin is looking at 2020. I think she’ll try to rack up political IOUs by supporting another candidate in 2012. If that candidate wins, she’ll angle for a position in the administration, possibly energy secretary, and she’ll run when that President’s term is coming to a close. (This speculation is obviously just for fun since we can’t possibly know the factors that will come into play.)

I also think it’s entirely possible she will relish her role as a free agent in conservative politics, and will spend the rest of her career using her considerable fundraising power to help bankroll conservative candidates.

I don’t have a horse in the 2012 race yet because too much remains to be seen. Where does Palin stand on immigration? Will Hunstman be a viable candidate? Who else will emerge as a possible contender?

At any rate, people on the right who count Palin out are failing to recognize her history of unconventional strategy, her staying power, and yes, her cult of personality. People on the left are making a grave error if they think she won’t continue to be a huge force in American politics. Love her or hate her, she’s not fading into the wallpaper any time soon.

]]> By: Eclectic Radical http://www.jennqpublic.com/sarahcuda-unbound/comment-page-1/#comment-4707 Eclectic Radical Thu, 09 Jul 2009 10:37:42 +0000 http://www.jennqpublic.com/?p=1404#comment-4707 It IS well written. Naturally I disagree with it to some extent. ;) I think enough people have raised the issue, both about the silly and stupid stuff that is obviously nasty political propaganda thought up by some blogger sitting in his underwear eating popcorn and about the much more serious and genuine issues. I will just note that the claim that she has 'beaten every charge' is not strictly true. The Branchflower report very specifically found that she had violated Alaska's state ethics laws. It did note that she was not impeachable because of the differing standards of the impeachment requirements and the ethics laws, but she WAS found to have abused her power in a manner incompatible with the ethics code in improperly firing state officers and improperly using influence to get a state employee fired. Beyond that I'm not going to go on ad infinitum, because I am honestly not interested in what she does until 2011. At that point, I may or may not say something. It really depends on too many factors to predict. I confess to a certain degree of grumpiness about the manner in which the facts seem not to matter to otherwise intelligent and sensible people in this area, but I also understand the strong loyalties political contention creates and remember how many people in the Democratic Party were unwilling to believe Bill Clinton could do any wrong. That's life. It IS well written. Naturally I disagree with it to some extent. ;)

I think enough people have raised the issue, both about the silly and stupid stuff that is obviously nasty political propaganda thought up by some blogger sitting in his underwear eating popcorn and about the much more serious and genuine issues. I will just note that the claim that she has ‘beaten every charge’ is not strictly true. The Branchflower report very specifically found that she had violated Alaska’s state ethics laws. It did note that she was not impeachable because of the differing standards of the impeachment requirements and the ethics laws, but she WAS found to have abused her power in a manner incompatible with the ethics code in improperly firing state officers and improperly using influence to get a state employee fired.

Beyond that I’m not going to go on ad infinitum, because I am honestly not interested in what she does until 2011. At that point, I may or may not say something. It really depends on too many factors to predict.

I confess to a certain degree of grumpiness about the manner in which the facts seem not to matter to otherwise intelligent and sensible people in this area, but I also understand the strong loyalties political contention creates and remember how many people in the Democratic Party were unwilling to believe Bill Clinton could do any wrong. That’s life.

]]> By: Jenn Q. Public http://www.jennqpublic.com/sarahcuda-unbound/comment-page-1/#comment-4667 Jenn Q. Public Wed, 08 Jul 2009 23:14:58 +0000 http://www.jennqpublic.com/?p=1404#comment-4667 Sally and snaggletoothie, thank you. Sally and snaggletoothie, thank you.

]]> By: snaggletoothie http://www.jennqpublic.com/sarahcuda-unbound/comment-page-1/#comment-4623 snaggletoothie Wed, 08 Jul 2009 06:32:12 +0000 http://www.jennqpublic.com/?p=1404#comment-4623 Great writing. Instead of the question being why did Sarah resign it really is what possible excuse is there for Murtha, Dodd, Frank, Rangel, Feinstein and so many others to not resigning for the good of the republic. I am also hopeful that out of office SP will develop some tactics for dealing with the plague of locusts traveling road show that the dinosaur media have become. Great writing.
Instead of the question being why did Sarah resign it really is what possible excuse is there for Murtha, Dodd, Frank, Rangel, Feinstein and so many others to not resigning for the good of the republic.
I am also hopeful that out of office SP will develop some tactics for dealing with the plague of locusts traveling road show that the dinosaur media have become.

]]> By: sally http://www.jennqpublic.com/sarahcuda-unbound/comment-page-1/#comment-4541 sally Mon, 06 Jul 2009 16:09:00 +0000 http://www.jennqpublic.com/?p=1404#comment-4541 wonderfully articulated. wonderfully articulated.

]]>