For many conservatives, the thrill is gone when it comes to one-time favorite Sarah Palin, who delivered a speech at last weekend's Iowa Freedom Summit that left many wondering what happened to the rising star they had once embraced.
The complaints about the speech have been sharp, but not only among the sources who usually pan the former Alaska governor and 2008 GOP vice presidential nominee, reports The Washington Post.
And even though Palin commented when she arrived at the event that she is "seriously interested" in seeking the GOP nomination in 2016, her long speech at the summit to party loyalists was described by many as being disjointed, reports the Post, with lines such as "GOP leaders, by the way, you know, 'The Man,' can only ride ya when your back is bent. So strengthen it. Then The Man can't ride ya."
And the reviews are scathing.
Charles C.W. Cooke, of The National Review, for example, panned the speech as the "foreordained culmination of a slow and unseemly descent into farce ... Palin should leave the field to those who are in possession of genuine political aspirations, and she should refrain from treating the Republican party as if it were a little more than a convenient vehicle for her private ambition."
His comments were far different from the glowing review that Review editor Rich Lowry gave her in 2008 after her stirring debut at the Republican National Convention, when he called her speech "so sparkling it was almost mesmerizing."
Further, Weekly Standard editor William Kristol, who has backed Palin since 2007, when she was the governor in Alaska, commented that — although he'd said less than a year ago that Palin could be "formidable" in a Republican primary — she is no longer a player.
"The name Sarah Palin hasn't come up in the past three to six months," he said in an interview Wednesday, reports the Post. "Maybe the speech Saturday was just a confirmation of her no longer being a major player, at least in these circles."
And while Palin is still a draw for some conservatives, Byron York of The Washington Examiner said there is concern that Republicans are treating her with more importance than she may still merit.
"Conservatives still empathize with her over the beating she took from the media in 2008," York said. "But if there is indeed nothing behind her 'seriously interested' talk — and it appears there is not — should she be included in events leading up to the 2016 caucuses?"
Washington Post columnist Kathleen Parker wrote after the speech that Republicans were to blame for Palin's decline.
"In the end, the story of Palin's rise and fall is a tragedy," she wrote. "And the author wasn't the media as accused but the Grand Old Party itself. Like worshipers of false gods throughout human history, Republicans handpicked the fair maiden Sarah and placed her on the altar of political expedience."
Fox News Channel host Sean Hannity on Tuesday asked Palin, a guest on his show, the reasons for the speech, including whether her teleprompter went down or if she had difficulty because "people had been so critical."
Palin, though, blamed the criticism on the media's "herd mentality," and said her "seriously interested" comment was to a "pesty reporter" while she was busy "promoting my Sportsman Channel show."
However, she told Hannity she is interested in running.
Palin had a choice after the 2008 campaign, said Kristol, to "sober up and prove the buggers wrong," but she didn't do that. "The rest of us should choose to move on."
But there is one Republican who says Palin would make a good presidential candidate in 2016: her former running mate, Sen. John McCain.
"She's very interesting. And I'm sure she'd do great," the Arizona Republican told the Post on Wednesday.
Although Palin clashed with McCain's campaign team during the 2008 race, they have remained close. McCain praises her consistently, and she backed his 2010 re-election bid.
Palin accomplished more than any Republican has since 0blabla has been President; SHE was basically the ONLY Republican/Conservative blasting away and ridiculing 0blabla's hypocrisy, treason, and destructive policies. At great risk and personal peace of mind.
She demonstrated far more courage and conviction to principle than just about any other public figure in that duration -- despite the constant media assault, Dem assault, AND GOP assault against her. The rest of the GOP were eunuchs, church-mice, and cowards. Go ahead and remind me -- during 0blabla's first 4 years of cratering the USA, which higher-profile opposition launched more salvos at the Traitor-in-Chief? NAME THEM. Thanks.
To obsess on her "support" of McStain (obligatory and pedestrian in nature) is asinine, short-sighted, and petty in the context of Palin's one-person political Rambo-ism.
Then, by all means vote for her, even as a write-in candidate. Don't be surprised if there aren't many votes: yours and McCain?
Not the point, Don. On a hundred points, you obsess on ONE. With all due respect, I don't think that's fair.
I did NOT see Palin go out of her way to wave pom-poms for Stain -- much as that's become the meme for some of you. Her endorsement was lukewarm at best. And a matter of a behind the scene agreement, presumably.
What of the 99 other points of contention where she had our brethrens' back?
Basically NO ONE was supporting this brave woman AND our sister in the Lord while she was busy being a lightning rod for the media, taking pot-shots as the liberal MSM blatantly attempted to intimidate and ridicule her AND her family; her church set afire; her trash rifled thru; a lib set up shop in the house next door; Her family harassed; Palin was blamed for every incident possible -- including the liberal murderer and shooter of Gabby Giffords, Jared Loughner.
But there Palin was -- STILL figurative guns ablaze, emptying out magazine after magazine in defending herself -- as well on behalf of our conservative brothers and sisters -- unloading against the liberal-Dem lies, and the destruction of our republic, spearheaded by the subversive MSM, social media, and of course its satanic "leader" on FOX. She continued she campaign WHERE EVER she went, however she could. At times it was Palin and NO one else who dared take the bastards on.
As every other Republican and so-called "conservative" went into hiding under their bed as the MSM and 0blabla steamrolled the fang-less GOP, THERE was Palin speaking as the opposition, supporting the 2A, the constitutions, Christians, conservative values -- while ridiculing 0blabla and Dem policies IN PUBLIC. What did you and others do to help our cause?
Palin was a planned punching bag for the RNC from Day One. She was supposed to made into a caricature of "stupid" Christians as Stain's running mate, THE scapegoat for Stain's losing the Presidency. Instead she almost dragged his sorry azz over the finish line. Until he sabotaged it once and for all.
No, I don't need Palin to become Prez. Never did. She accomplished what she had to: Hold the fort for conservative principles and constitutional liberty, while staving off Liberal-Left-Dem attacks, one-handed for 6 years. She held the fort until some, ANY enforcements turned up from the feckless GOP -- which till this day we can STILL count on one hand.
Palin is and was an inspirational hero in my eyes and heart. I am hardly the only one.
I don't see Sarah as the modern King Leonidas, not even something of a Joan of Arc. There has been no great strength in Republican garb to arise to save the nation. Perhaps, Sarah meant well, but she hasn't made a difference.
One thing that really hurt her was her resignation from the Governor of Alaska position. Maybe, if she could have stuck it out, her position would be changed, but she couldn't. She had a chance to show her strength, but couldn't last.
Her support of a great RINO branded her as the same. Her family problems didn't help her either. I don't need to say anymore about her. I suspect she is a well-meaning and honorable person. Now she wants to run for President? How strong would she be in that position? Well, never mind. The question was rhetorical.
