Taking Sarah at Face Value
| Tue Jul. 7, 2009 8:00 AM PDT
Sarah Palin, decked out in fishing gear and hauling in the salmon, talks to ABC's Kate Snow about why she quit as governor of Alaska:
Palin conceded many people are still confused about why she made the decision to leave office. "You know why they're confused? I guess they cannot take something nowadays at face value," Palin said.
But she said a major factor in the decision was the mounting legal bills she and the state have had to incur to fight ethics charges from her political adversaries. None of the accusations has been proven but, she said, the costs of fighting them have been enormous.
"You know conditions have really changed in Alaska in the political arena since Aug. 29, since I was tapped to run for VP. When that opposition research — those researchers really bombarded Alaska — started digging for dirt and have not let up. They're not gonna find any dirt," she said. "We keep proving that every time we win an ethics violation lawsuit and we've won every one of them. But it has been costing our state millions of dollars. It's cost Todd and me. You know the adversaries would love to see us put on the path of personal bankruptcy so that we can't afford to run."
I'm actually more willing than most to take Palin's explanation at face value. The constant stream of piddling and frivolous ethics charges probably did get hard to put up with and probably did cost her a lot of money. But don't most politicians in similar circumstances set up a legal defense fund of some kind? The attacks would still be annoying, but dealing with them doesn't necessarily have to be either a huge time sink or a huge personal cost, especially when you have the fundraising power she does.
Very mysterious. But my guess is that the other half of her explanation should be taken at face value too. (Well, face value plus a little bit extra.) Namely that she doesn't want to be a lame duck. Not because she doesn't want to milk the good citizens of Alaska for lots of overseas junkets, but because the entire legislature hates her guts these days and the whole thing has become a slog. "We won't get anything done," she told Snow, and just that's no fun. Giving speeches to adoring throngs is way more satisfying.
Advertisement
Advertisement
Comments
And she also stands to make
Submitted by g. powell on Tue Jul. 7, 2009 8:18 AM PDT.
And she also stands to make a fortune. If she waited a couple a years before cashing in on her fame, there is no guarantee that those opportunities would still be there.
And I also think it still leaves open a 2012 run. I don't think she had a prayer if she took the conventional route that would have involved actually governing and debating policy with Romney. But if she makes herself into some sort of warped, conservative Oprah, she could engineer a faux-populist, outsider run. Truely scary.
But I think her priority right now is to make lots of money.
She Did
Submitted by Akhbar the Great on Tue Jul. 7, 2009 8:39 AM PDT.
But don't most politicians in similar circumstances set up a legal defense fund of some kind? The attacks would still be annoying, but dealing with them doesn't necessarily have to be either a huge time sink or a huge personal cost, especially when you have the fundraising power she does.
She has one, though it isn't officially sanctioned by her. See, for instance, here.
"It is, therefore, a just political maxim, that every man must be supposed a knave" - David Hume
http://theenlighteneddespot.com
too big to fail (in her own mind)
Submitted by linus (not verified) on Tue Jul. 7, 2009 9:46 AM PDT.
Maybe she's the next David Caruso, taking for granted a job that most in her business will never get, and coming to believe the flattery dished out by the legions of suck ups around her.
failin' palin
Submitted by me (not verified) on Tue Jul. 7, 2009 10:22 PM PDT.
not a csi miami fan, eh? lol. that said, i hope she takes up knitting instead.
She has a legal defense fund
Submitted by gyrfalcon on Tue Jul. 7, 2009 9:59 AM PDT.
to help with the cost of defending against the mostly idiotic ethics complaints. Guess what?
They filed an ethics complaint about the legal defense fund.
She's quite clearly the object of simple harassment by these complaints. It's the equivalent of a corporate SLAPP suit, filed not because it has any particular chance of succeeding but because it ties up the time and resources of the person being sued.
Legal Defense Fund
Submitted by Tommy Corn (not verified) on Tue Jul. 7, 2009 11:14 AM PDT.
There was one set up for her, and it bombed. She needs to hit the speaking tour to make some money.
Palin and Cyndi
Submitted by E L (not verified) on Tue Jul. 7, 2009 11:27 AM PDT.
"Girls just want to have fun." Cyndi Lauper
This is precisely one of the
Submitted by John Hansen (not verified) on Tue Jul. 7, 2009 11:47 AM PDT.
This is precisely one of the reasons she is popular. She can be taken at face value.
I find this a big difference between candidates who are popular with Republicans and candidates who are popular with Democrats.
Republicans like people who speak plainly. Ronald Reagan, George W. Bush, Sarah Palin. ( Please notice I did not put John McCain on this list. ). Note that every one of these people spoke plainly. And because they spoke plainly, they are and were reviled and even called dumb by the pseudo-intellectual DC-Yale-Harvard type of mindset so prevalent in the liberal punditry of today.
Democrats like nuanced messages ( William J. Clinton, Barack Obama ) come to mind. ( Harry S. Truman being a notable exception ).
Now we can debate about whether the above is true or not, but I think it is a pretty good premise. Repubs like plain speech, Democrats prefer nuanced. Democrats can't help but interpret this as they their guys are smarter. I interpret this as Democrats want to be fooled by their candidates.
The question to consider is why?
Thanks, but No thanks
Submitted by SRW1 (not verified) on Tue Jul. 7, 2009 12:12 PM PDT.
Well, I don't want to play house, but you can go into your corner and consider.
Plain Spoken My Ass
Submitted by g. powell on Tue Jul. 7, 2009 12:25 PM PDT.
Ronald Reagan spoke plainly, so did George W. But please don't put Palin in that modest class, she is utterly incoherent. She strings together a bunch of catch phrases with no connecting theme. I can't think of a single idea that she has ever expressed.
And yes, complicated, nuanced ideas are associated with intelligence. Sometimes it takes a paragraph to express them.
Today's Republicans are fearful people and they want the world reduced to simple messages that make them feel safe. But reality is more complicated and pretending it isn't is pure foolishness.
plainly spoken
Submitted by spot (not verified) on Tue Jul. 7, 2009 10:53 PM PDT.
"Repubs like plain speech, Democrats prefer nuanced. Democrats can't help but interpret this as they their guys are smarter. I interpret this as Democrats want to be fooled by their candidates. The question to consider is why?"
There is nothing "plain-spoken" about this statement. This is nothing more than an attempt at Manipulation by purporting to seek an answer to a nonsensical question stemming from a baseless "interpretation" in an attempt to stear the reader away from actually Thinking about the Rational and Validity of the statement itself. sneaky And pretentious. Exactly what i've come to expect from the "plain(ly)-spoken(subterfuge)" republicans. seriously though, while i pity the poor sucker who did his ivy league homework, i'm sure W. appreciated the vast "nuances" therein nevertheless.
Brush, anyone?
Submitted by thersites on Tue Jul. 7, 2009 12:12 PM PDT.
One of my favorite segments of this sorry episode was a local talk-show pinhead talking about how Sarah sitting there gutting fish while being interviewed proved that she is one of us.
I'll bet he enjoyed watching W clear brush on his ranch, too.
It's called accountability
Submitted by JLW (not verified) on Tue Jul. 7, 2009 12:25 PM PDT.
During Sarah Palin's inauguration speech she touted her push for ethics reform and said, “hold me accountable”. That's what people in Alaska want to do. Unfortunately all the ethics investigations, except for the original one instigated by a Republican-controlled legislature (over the Troopergate affair which found that she had violated the state Ethics Act) have been controlled by people appointed by, and serving at the pleasure of, the governor. As to the costs to the state for defending against the complaints, the most expensive was the one she filed AGAINST HERSELF in an attempt to override the legislature's Troopergate investigation. Some of the complaints may be frivolous but others seem not to be. But all are subject to the same potentially biased process so it's really hard to know what's valid and what isn't.
George W. Bush had an Ivy
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Tue Jul. 7, 2009 12:32 PM PDT.
George W. Bush had an Ivy League education. He wasn't a pseudo-intellectual, he was a pseudo-regular guy. And look where 8 years of plain talk got us. And Sarah Palin may have mastered plain talk, but 80% of what comes out her mouth is a lie.
I'll take nuance any day.
Republicans like quitters
Submitted by tpx on Tue Jul. 7, 2009 12:38 PM PDT.
Republicans like quitters. W. quit the Texas Air Force Reserve, and the Republicans loved his cowardice. Palin quits serving as governor, and Republicans think she is a great leader. Movement politics is not about governance, but about exhibiting allegiance to an ideology, which Palin is doing.
Plain Spoken
Submitted by Tom S (not verified) on Tue Jul. 7, 2009 2:23 PM PDT.
I think Mr. Hansen takes the plain-spoken thing too far. It is a decent observation regarding speaking styles. However, people who speak plainly can be just as deceptive as those who speak in paragraphs. The plain spoken politicians you cited all tend to assume facts when speaking or they just assert conclusions.
I think the difference between Palin and Reagan (or George W. Bush) is that she is more likely to: (1) actually believe the falsehoods that she is stating or (2) get mixed up about how she is trying to manipulate the truth. Reagan was a great speaker. George W. Bush stumbled a lot but stayed on message most of the time. Sarah Palin has a good style but she (1) does not have the name Bush to protect her and (2) knows too little about the underlying issues to be very good at lying.
Those who speak in paragraphs (Obama, Clinton) deal with facts in their rhetoric. Of course, speakers like Clinton and Obama can sometimes cherry pick facts or tell audiences what they like to hear (and then do something else). But that is logically no different than what 'plain spoken' people do when they assume facts or ignore them altogether.
Given Plain Resides in an Alternate Realilty
Submitted by Chris Brown on Tue Jul. 7, 2009 2:37 PM PDT.
Certainly we should take her explanation at face value.
Strive For The Ideal, But Deal With What's Real
The "Alaska Fund Trust"
Submitted by BlogD (not verified) on Tue Jul. 7, 2009 4:25 PM PDT.
A previous commenter pointed to the "Sarah Palin Defense Fund," but that appears to be an unofficial defense fund. The "Alaska Fund Trust," on the other hand, claims that "This is the official website for the Governor Sarah Palin legal expense fund." I can only presume it's legit, but haven't checked it out thoroughly.
Whatever the case, I sincerely doubt that Palin will ever be in danger of actually paying all of her legal fees--and if she does, she's got that $7 million book deal with HarperCollins to tide her over.
She violated the state Ethics Act
Submitted by Detroit Dan on Tue Jul. 7, 2009 6:29 PM PDT.
She was acting unethically from step one in her career. I'm glad that she's out of government, and I hope she disappears from the scene...
I am willing to take Sarah
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Wed Jul. 8, 2009 6:41 AM PDT.
I am willing to take Sarah Palin at face value, the problem is determining which face!
"plainspoken" Sarah
Submitted by Canadian observer (not verified) on Wed Jul. 8, 2009 12:59 PM PDT.
A plainspoken person is one who is capable of uttering, at the very least, a simple declarative sentence which includes a subject, a predicate, a noun, a verb and, most importantly, a coherent thought.
Governor Palin trademark steam-of-unrelated phrases and linguistic fragments fails on all counts (no matter her political persuasion).
Thank God the mortgage
Submitted by louis vuitton replica (not verified) on Mon Aug. 3, 2009 8:00 AM PDT.
Thank God the mortgage interest deduction is sacrosanct. Removing one of the cornerstones of America's middle class would be an economic disaster. Construction is the largest nongovernmental sector of our economy, and home construction and remodeling is a significant proportion of that. Eliminating the deduction on mortgage interest would idle millions of workers.tiffany jewelry
Post new comment
MoJo Comments: Send Us Your Feedback
We changed our spam software to better filter comments. Should you encounter any issues, please let us know.
