“His passions are terrible,” said Jefferson. “I feel much alarmed at
the prospect of seeing General Jackson President. He is one of the most
unfit men I know of for such a place ... He is a dangerous man.”

Sounds almost as if he was talking about Sarah Palin. Or Ted Cruz. The only
two in the sleepyhead lineup of CPAC 2013 nostalgicos who will bring the
audience to its feet.

sb1776 wrote: I don't see many similarities between the two.

sb1776 wrote: I don't see many similarities between the two.

sb1776 wrote: But purposefully aligning oneself with a group that is targeted for discrediting by the media isn't a very wise battle to pick.

AUCOM96 wrote: I was with you to this point.

Any "conservative" figure is targeted by the media for discrediting.

It would be nice just to see something with an ideological backbone in the GOP ranks. There is more marketing going on in that party than a Black Friday sale at Macy's, but little conviction in any particular direction. Palin is just selling books. Cruz? Hard to say. He sounds good now, but I was high on Ryan at one time too...and the GOP used him badly. The GOP's days are numbered and what (if anything) rises in its place is going to have to get over the fear of the media and stand for something.

sb1776 wrote: But purposefully aligning oneself with a group that is targeted for discrediting by the media isn't a very wise battle to pick.

sb1776 wrote: Well it depends. I know they'll come for you regardless. But, the media will flock to the greatest weakness, because it is easy. The media is more likely to pick a fight with Jennifer Rubin than Mark Steyn, because it is much easier to go 10 rounds with the former. You can't avoid media confrontation as a conservative, but you can avoid aligning yourself with people who have proven very vulnerable to media pitfalls.

I would want Cruz to be like Ryan in pit bull fashion. I want a handful of competent GOP leaders who can go toe to toe with anyone in media or the left. That doesn't just mean that they're smart enough (which has been a problem), but that they know how to deal with the situation. You can be brilliant and still look dumb with Bill Maher. It isn't because he's a genius, it is simply that he can weasel a debate to his favor in front of a home crowd. We need people who can handle that, and call the unfairness on the spot without looking petty. 

I would love to see Rubio or Cruz or Ryan, in an interview with This Week or some other show, breakdown what a specific question they're asked means. For example, when Akin was lit up about women and abortion, I'd love to see a smarter candidate go through what would happen re: media reaction with any given answer. Ryan has come close to that with the presidency questions, by basically saying "listen, I honestly don't know right now. If I say X, you'll do X, but I really don't know. I'll think about it, I'm not denying that, but I can't give you an answer, and in the meantime I'm going to continue to do my present job."

AUCOM96 wrote: I was with you to this point.

Any "conservative" figure is targeted by the media for discrediting.

It would be nice just to see something with an ideological backbone in the GOP ranks. There is more marketing going on in that party than a Black Friday sale at Macy's, but little conviction in any particular direction. Palin is just selling books. Cruz? Hard to say. He sounds good now, but I was high on Ryan at one time too...and the GOP used him badly. The GOP's days are numbered and what (if anything) rises in its place is going to have to get over the fear of the media and stand for something.

sb1776 wrote: But purposefully aligning oneself with a group that is targeted for discrediting by the media isn't a very wise battle to pick.

AUCOM96 wrote: I agree, but step one is someone has to have a philosophy. Obama lies and talks around what he believes in, but he BELIEVES in something. The GOP believes in little to nothing and therefore has a very tough time communicating. The weakness the media goes after isn't just the weak link, it's the complete lack of sincerity and consistency in the 'conservative' message. They know most of the GOP are just as much the big government DC hacks as the left, but since their only drive tends to be personal ambition and pork they are ducks on a pond for a biased media.

sb1776 wrote: Well it depends. I know they'll come for you regardless. But, the media will flock to the greatest weakness, because it is easy. The media is more likely to pick a fight with Jennifer Rubin than Mark Steyn, because it is much easier to go 10 rounds with the former. You can't avoid media confrontation as a conservative, but you can avoid aligning yourself with people who have proven very vulnerable to media pitfalls.

I would want Cruz to be like Ryan in pit bull fashion. I want a handful of competent GOP leaders who can go toe to toe with anyone in media or the left. That doesn't just mean that they're smart enough (which has been a problem), but that they know how to deal with the situation. You can be brilliant and still look dumb with Bill Maher. It isn't because he's a genius, it is simply that he can weasel a debate to his favor in front of a home crowd. We need people who can handle that, and call the unfairness on the spot without looking petty. 

I would love to see Rubio or Cruz or Ryan, in an interview with This Week or some other show, breakdown what a specific question they're asked means. For example, when Akin was lit up about women and abortion, I'd love to see a smarter candidate go through what would happen re: media reaction with any given answer. Ryan has come close to that with the presidency questions, by basically saying "listen, I honestly don't know right now. If I say X, you'll do X, but I really don't know. I'll think about it, I'm not denying that, but I can't give you an answer, and in the meantime I'm going to continue to do my present job."

AUCOM96 wrote: I was with you to this point.

Any "conservative" figure is targeted by the media for discrediting.

It would be nice just to see something with an ideological backbone in the GOP ranks. There is more marketing going on in that party than a Black Friday sale at Macy's, but little conviction in any particular direction. Palin is just selling books. Cruz? Hard to say. He sounds good now, but I was high on Ryan at one time too...and the GOP used him badly. The GOP's days are numbered and what (if anything) rises in its place is going to have to get over the fear of the media and stand for something.

sb1776 wrote: But purposefully aligning oneself with a group that is targeted for discrediting by the media isn't a very wise battle to pick.

sb1776 wrote: 
On the other hand, one is a US Senator, the other is a political personality. One is a lawmaker on an upswing, one is ??? with waning influence. One graduated from Harvard Law and Princeton, was an AD atty general and law professor, and one didn't/wasn't.

Flats wrote:

sb1776 wrote: 
On the other hand, one is a US Senator, the other is a political personality. One is a lawmaker on an upswing, one is ??? with waning influence. One graduated from Harvard Law and Princeton, was an AD atty general and law professor, and one didn't/wasn't.

Sheila Jackson Lee is a US Representative, graduated from Yale and UVA Law.  Just sayin........

sb1776 wrote: Now you and I have gone 10 rounds on academia before, but I won't touch this one. It certainly isn't 100% reliable, but as a general rule I think it works well enough.

Flats wrote:

sb1776 wrote: 
On the other hand, one is a US Senator, the other is a political personality. One is a lawmaker on an upswing, one is ??? with waning influence. One graduated from Harvard Law and Princeton, was an AD atty general and law professor, and one didn't/wasn't.

Sheila Jackson Lee is a US Representative, graduated from Yale and UVA Law.  Just sayin........

sb1776 wrote: Dontae, I don't find that people fear Palin, at least not anymore. I do think people obsess over her, but I don't think that is because they're terrified at heart. 

If you have anything you want me to consider on that point, go ahead, but she's become unreliable as an indicator of election success. If I were a liberal talking head, I wouldn't be especially worried about going up against her (with the exception of my inherently flawed outlook).

dontae1 wrote:

sb1776 wrote: Dontae, I don't find that people fear Palin, at least not anymore. I do think people obsess over her, but I don't think that is because they're terrified at heart. 

If you have anything you want me to consider on that point, go ahead, but she's become unreliable as an indicator of election success. If I were a liberal talking head, I wouldn't be especially worried about going up against her (with the exception of my inherently flawed outlook).

There are some things we know. We know that Governor Palin generates excitement at her appearances. Lots of support, but I'll admit, coupled with lots of attacks from media, GOPe, Dems, etc. She simply creates a major stir both positive and negative.

At last years CPAC it was tremendously under reported, but the crowd she drew at her speech was overwhelming. Most of the speakers had trouble filling their venue, generating little excitement. As the time started approaching for Governor Palin's speech (hours before her speech) the crowds started swelling. I was there. Don't know precisely how long before because my daughter and I only arrived a couple hours before her speech. My daughter and I had wanted to get in to see her. Unfortunately we arrived only a couple hours before her scheduled speech. I had no idea what to expect this being my first CPAC. My daughter and I went to the area for her speech. There were lines at least 4 abreast down the halls (plural is correct). We walked down halls with lines as far as you could see, turned the corner and lines continued down the next hall as far as you could see. Basically oceans of people. They began to open overflow rooms and filled them all. My daughter and I ended up watching the speech on monitors in one of the lobby areas. All the lobby areas were also filled with people sitting in to watch on video monitors. But again, that was seriously under reported.

Now let me speculate (add 2 + 2 from things we already know). Governor Palin was a late addition to the CPAC 2013 agenda. I don't know, but I'll suspect. Maybe CPAC did not want to invite Governor Palin, but they knew adding her to the agenda would increase demand like nothing else could.

One thing I can assure you. If Sarah Palin makes a decision to put her hat in the ring there will be some major ground shaking. The ground shaking will be both good and bad (supports vs haters), so I don't presume to suggest that it will all be good. But I can assure you that there will be a battle like nothing we have seen in recent elections. She will not be in to play paddy cake.