Key Issues for Sarah Palin

NOTE: GOVERNOR SARAH PALIN WILL BE ON THE COVER OF VOGUE MAGAZINE IN FEBRUARY. VOGUE MAY HAVE MORE SENSE THAN THE REPUBLICAN PARTY.

For many months, I've been one of a group on the Internet advocating that the Republican presidential nominee, whomever he turns out to be, choose Gov. Sarah Heath Palin of Alaska as his running mate. When Adam Brickley started the "Draft Palin" Movement, he, I, and another guy were the three known members of the group. Since then, a lot more people -- some of them national figures -- have joined the growing crowd.

A few months ago, I separated myself (slightly) from the Draft Palin for VP effort and started my own one-man band -- one dedicated to getting Sarah the presidential nomination in either 2012 or 2016. I started wondering -- and, among Palinites this is something of a heresy -- whether it would be a good idea for her to seek the vice-presidency.

Behind my (slight) change in views on the best scenario from Sarah was a growing belief that no Republican nominee can win the presidency in 2008. In a previous column I mentioned The Economist's note that registered Democrats now outnumber registered Republicans by 50% to 35%. I also observed that the Democratic nominees have raised an amazing 70% more cash than their Republican counterparts. A similar fundraising imbalance exists with the two congressional committees.

For Sarah Palin, the question is if it would advance her career to run as the vice-presidential nominee on a losing ticket. Yes, it would do wonders for her name recognition, and the world would get a better sense of what an outstanding human being she is. On the other hand, vice-presidential nominees on tickets that lose big tend to disappear quickly.

Consider Barry Goldwater's running mate in 1964 -- Bill Miller of Lockport, New York -- a man who might have been vaporized after his losing effort. Or consider John Edwards (Kerry, 2004), a man who believes he's a serious candidate for President but will be forevermore the guy who got the $400 hair cut. And whatever happened to Joe Lieberman (Gore, 2000)? Or Dan Quayle (Bush, 1988, 1992)? Or Jack Kemp (Dole, 1996)?

Running for V-P on the wrong ticket can be a real career-stopper.Sarah, it may be that the best thing which could ever happen to you is NOT to be on ticket in 2008. However, I'm still predicting that -- eventually -- they will need to reserve a spot for you on Mt. Rushmore.

AN APPEAL TO GOV. SARAH PALIN: GO FOR IT!

I received the following from Adam Brickley, founder of the Draft Palin Effort:

"Conservative web guru Patrick Ruffini (webmaster for the Bush-Cheney Campaign in 2004) has just posted a glowing column about Gov. Palin on Townhall.com. He even mentions our movement, agreeing with us in principle but saying we're "a bit early". Other than that one quip, his column is spot-on in my opinion. Click here to read the column.Adam BrickleyFounder, palinforvp.blogpsot.com."


Here's the link to Patrick's essay on Sarah ("The GOP's North Star"): http:/townhall.com/columnists/Column.aspxUrlTitle=the_gops_north_star&ns=PatrickRuffini&dt=09/29/2007&page=full&comments=true&submitted=true0188d8c6-5b38-4a6c-a329-b3e76c3cfbcb


Here's My Response to Adam:

Adam, I saw the Patrick Ruffini column saluting Sarah and agree that it's a very good one. A "bit early" doesn't strike me as too extreme in his comment about Sarah and the nation's highest offices.

Soon, perhaps, say by the election in 2008, it won't be "a bit early" for her to be on the national ticket.

Consider: when I was your age (previous century, but not telling exactly which century) freshmen in college were't allowed to play on the varsity football and basketball teams. The idea was that they (and even sophomores) were't "ready." Of course, we found out that was not true -- and, in some cases, it was absolutely absurd.

Today, in Charlottesville, Virginia, the University of Pittsburgh football team will start a freshman at QB and another one at running back. three years ago, West Virginia University started two freshmen in the backfrield and both got some mention for All-American teams. I guess they were a lot more "ready" than people might have imagined.

I even disagree with my friend Malia in Hawaii some on the question of Sarah's readiness to assume the presidency if necessary. I think she is in fact ready now (if it became necessary) to lead this country -- mainly because leadership is a question of character, willingness to listen and learn, and a desire to serve the "governed."

More and more people look at Sarah and soon begin to wonder: "Is there any space left on Mr. Rushmore?" One recent blog noted Sarah's ridiculously low 4% disapproval rating (and nearly 90% approval) and proclaimed: "She's More Popular Than Kittens." She has touched the hearts of her constituents in a way we've not seen with any other elected official.

People used to pester us with questions about Sarah's "stand" on the War on Terror. When her son Track, age 18, enlisted in the Army on 9/11-2007, I think we learned all we need to about the Palin family's views on that subject.

Sarah Palin has a connection with key issues (including the WOT) that is more direct and personal -- than any other candidate under consideration for President or V-P. She has more knowledge on critical issues -- especially energy and the environment. She rejects the view that top elected official has to be some sort of egomanic. Instead, she sees herself a "a willing servant."

This is a remarkable woman, and we don't even have the right to ask her to be more remarkable.

Adam, I'd compare Sarah in some ways to the founder of the Draft Palin movement -- which happens to be you. You're 20 years old. You're much "too young" (in the minds of some) to have accomplished what you have -- turning this effort into the largest such grass-roots undertaking now underway. I guess the fact that it's "a bit early" to achieve such things means you should have devoted your time to "normal" college activities, such as kegging, painting your face with the school colors, chasing girls, etc.

Right now, you're the same age Bill Gates was when he dropped out of Harvard to form the company that became Microsoft.

I've osaid that if Sarah were a Democrat, she'd be right up on the stage with Hillary, Obama, and the others. Even with her short tenure as Governor, she has more executive experience than Mrs. Clinton and Obama combined.

We Republicans tend to place a lot of value on "experience," which usually means that we end up running candidates who are eligible for Medicare and Social Security. Dick Cheney is a fine man, but he's too ill, too old, and too widely disliked to be an asset to George W. Bush. As for Dan Quayle, I don't know about his "experience," but he didn't have the intellect , dynamism, or candor of a person like Sarah Palin.

Someone (John Ehrlichman I think) once asked Richard Nixon why he chose Spiro Agnew as his running mate. Nixon said, "Because no one in his right mind would think of assassinating me."

As a political Party, we can do better, much better. Adam, the success of your "Sarah Project" derives from your initial perception that we as Republicans can't continue running a bunch of aging, exhausted Caucasian males. Frankly, we don't want to be a Party mainly appealing to "angry, old white guys." There's no future in that approach.

Like anyone in high office, Sarah would need good people around her. (Adam, you should be one of those people -- and Patrick Ruffini and Fred Barnes should be others. So should some of the people that received my e-mail today on this subject.)

In all candor, the kind of "experience" Sarah lacks is the type that seems to produce mainly Beltway Cynicism and the politicization of every aspect of an indvidual's being. Adam, at some point in our lifetime, we want someone on the ticket -- as V-P nominee first and later as presidential nominee -- who has the potential to be a Washington, a Lincoln, a Truman, or a Reagan.

If not Sarah, who? If not now, when?

Steve Maloney
"All Sarah (Almost) All the Time"

Note: I'll put up Patrick's entire article later today (Saturday)

Hey, What About a V-P (Sarah Palin) That American Voters Would Actually Like and Admire?

Because of our efforts on behalf of Gov. Palin, I get a lot of visitors from Alaska, many from obvious places like Anchorage, Fairbanks, and Wasilla (Sarah's hometown) but today I got a new one, Kasigluk. I looked it up in Wikipedia, and it's near the Bering Sea and has 543 residents (2000 census) in two villages, Akiuk and Akula. The population is 96.5% Native Alaskan, and the main source of power is from wind. .Welcome, Kasiglukians. As with all Alaskans, I feel very close to you and your remarkable Governor.

One of my favorite Mike Huckabee quotes (leaving aside John Edwards at the beauty salon): "Life doesn't end at birth."

Another blog I'm strongly recommending is Tennessee for Huckabee, with this link: http://tn4Huckabee.blogspot.com . Today, he reprints a fine Michael Medved column, one that makes a strong case for current GOP candidates as a whole lot better than those in the past. Read it and see if you don't agree. Here's a comment I made to tn4huck, whom I'm doing my "hot pursuit" number on in an effort to get him to sign up as a "Palin Fan."
And here's another one walking through the gates into the Palin camp: "http://kazoolist.blogspot.com/2007/08/palin-for-veep.html Kazoo read Adam Brickley's (http://palinforvp.blogspot.com/) original essay on The Case for Sarah, and it made eminent sense to him. I urge you to read his piece. I believe that by Feb. 5, 2008, Super Tuesday, we may just have our 777 Bloggers for Sarah. If we "only" have 599, however, I'll still be ready to claim victory.

I don't see Michael Medved's columns as often as I should. Generally, I love the guy. He's absolutely right -- this year's Republican candidates offer more diversity and better records of accomplishment than we generally get.

I wrote a column about three weeks ago going through the Republican choices for V-P over more than 50 years. Frankly, it's a sorry lot.

Nixon? Twice V-P, resigned later as President, although not before his own V-P, Agnew, resigned in a bribery scandal. Dan Quayle? Well, Sen. Quayle was a nice man, but he came across as dumb as a doorknob. Dick Cheney? Again, a good man (with a great wife and daughters), but he has a serious health problem and no plans to run for the presidency or any other office.

Presidential candidates (Republicans and Democrats) often seem to make their V-P choices out of a hat. When they're chosen to carry a particular state, the ticket ends up losing it, as happened with Nixon-Agnew and Maryland in 1968.

After the 1972 election, one of Nixon's top aides asked why he had kept Agnew on the ticket. The President replied, "No one in his right mind would want to assasinate me."

Most of us sitting at home watching FOX or CNN assume the presidential nominee goes through some calculating -- and even agonizing -- choice for a VP who is "thoroughly vetted." That just doesn't happen.

Yes, we do want to "push" somebody like Sarah Palin, an absolutely terrific candidate, on the presidential nominee. Why? Because we don't need another Spiro T. Agnew or even a Dan Quayle.

If worse comes to worse and Mrs. Clinton gets elected, we want someone there -- preferably a female -- who would be a ferocious competitor in 2012. We don't want someone who can carry one state. We want someone who will eventually carry the nation.

On the issues: as my earlier column (which will expand a little and become tomorrow's column) says: There are a lot of "conservative" candidates standing foursquare for the Family and children who don't practice what they preach. They tell us the lies they think we long to hear.

When it comes to have a large and loving family, Sarah Palin isn't relying on slogans. In fact, she goes home everyday to just such a situation. When it comes to political corruption, she doesn't just say she's "agin" it, but rather exposes the wrong-doers. Ironic as it seems to say it, she's putting her home state -- by far the largest one geographically -- on the map.

Gee, what if we had a candidate who truly was wonderful? Short answer: we do.

Stephen R. Maloney