I’ve been out of the country for a couple weeks, and I’m seriously jet lagged — but this headline over at Sullivan’s place took me a bit by surprise.
A Conservative’s Case for Sarah Palin’s Genius
Surely this must be a parody, I thought. Nope.
See, apparently, the Quitter gave a speech in D.C. on Friday, and these are the reasons she will make an awesome presidential candidate in 2012.
1. Palin as the “Mama Bear” defending America’s children from “generational theft.”
2. Palin as a “frontier feminist.”
1. She can testify.
2. She attacks Obama.
3. She relishes attacking liberals.
4. And she’s optimistic.
Some brief thoughts here.
1. El Rushbo is very good at attacking Obama and liberals — why not run him?
2. Lots of attacking doesn’t seem very “optimistic.”
2. Weren’t we told that a talent for speechmaking is a sign of vapidity?
4. “Mama Bear”?
1. Counting is hard.
So what’s this all mean?
After Palin finished her speech, I again thought about why left-leaning commentators mock, dismiss, and caricaturize [sic] her. And two things came to mind.
First, these critics probably have never fully listened to any of her speeches. […] But I think there’s something else at work here. I think liberals and those in the mainstream media fear her. Sure, they openly say she has no chance of beating President Obama – if she even runs, that is; but, inside, they must fear that she could very well beat President Obama in a one-on-one match-up.
I’m not sure why this “libruls mock her because they fear her” meme persists in the wingosphere, but I’m happy for them to believe it.
If really they want to run a massively, objectively unpopular half-term governor who was a total train wreck as a losing veep candidate — and that 70% of the country thinks is unqualified to be president — more power to ’em.
Anyway, what’s The Atlantic thinking?