Draft Sarah Palin for RNC Chair, sign the petition.
Why do I like Sarah?
I like the fact that her political strength comes largely from her apolitical demeanor. I like the fact that her party is a reflection of her values and not the source of those values. I like the fact that she has values based in her faith, and values based on the Constitution, relies on both and doesn't confuse the two. I like the fact that she has real public decision-making experience. I like the fact that she has greater fondness for action than rhetoric, and that her rhetoric is always based on her own historical experience, as opposed to intangible platitudes. I like the fact that she has a deep regard for Liberty. I like the feeling that she disdains the special interest groups, in favor of limited government.
Do I think she'd be a good President? Yes.
But, I also think she'd wield enormously positive influence over a Republican party that has for far too long sought its own perpetuation over the Founders' vision of Liberty. And making a real impact, a positive impact, on our society is something she says she aspires to.
Even before reading about this idea (I heard it from Jim Hoft at BigGovernmentdotcom) I wondered who'd be good to replace Steele if it came to that. And her name was the first that came to mind.
I don't necessarily subscribe to the notion that Steele must be ousted, just for his remarks over Afghanistan being Obama's war (See Ann Coulter's essay at TownHall on why, yes, it largely is now Obama's war), but his leadership has been mostly uninspiring, if not outright ineffective. I believe her presence in that position immediately legitimizes it, and de-fangs the entire establishment-politics syndrome that keeps rewarding career incumbents whose focus has strayed from serving the Constitution and their constituents to serving themselves.
I like Sarah, and I like the idea of her being drafted to Chair the RNC.
WHEREAS the current Chairman of the Republican National Committee, Michael Steele, has woefully and repeatedly misstepped in his capacity as party Chair, failing to provide the leadership and vision necessary to battle the Progressive Socialist Left’s agenda, and
WHEREAS he has also failed to cultivate and facilitate emerging Conservative candidates who are able to convincingly argue that Liberty is superior to dependence upon the State Apparatus, and
WHEREAS Sarah Palin, by way of radical contrast, consistently and enthusiastically argues on behalf of Liberty, Free Enterprise, Individualism, and a small and Constitutionally limited Federal Government, and
WHEREAS she has also demonstrated an innate affinity with the great majority of Liberty-Loving Americans, a capacity to inspire them to action, and a willingness to act as a National Leader on important Conservative Issues,
THEREFORE, We, the undersigned, submit that Sarah Palin, as soon as is practicably possible, ought to replace Michael Steele
I was the 200-'something'th signer, and hope you'll join me. Let's make it a million signers by the weekend.
Hey Jeff, I'm going to link to this. I like the idea too. Sort of. I love the idea of her being in that position in order to have more control over conservative candidates receiving adequate financial backing from the party. She would be a heck-of-a fundraiser, too.
ReplyDeleteI agree with you too, on her giving credibility to the party. It would be a great thing to have a true conservative in such a leadership role within the "establishment."
But, I wonder if being a "public" figure once again would inhibit her ability to speak out as she's been doing since resigning from the governorship. I wonder too how that would affect her being able to endorse certain candidates of her own choosing.
Not trying to put down the idea, just thinking it through, let me know what you think.
Hey Pup! Thanks.
ReplyDeleteI thought about that public responsibilty factor, too. In Alaska, if I recall correctly, anyone could lodge frivolous lawsuit after frivolous lawsuit and the citizens of the state were on the hook for the prosecution's legal fees. I gotta believe that as the Chairperson, having only the authority of leading the Party, she wouldn't have to answer to all the miscellaneous nutcases. Good point, though...
I wonder the same thing about who she would/could endorse. but even if she didn't always back the "most conservative" or "most Republican" candidate (in my eyes or or anyone else's), isn't it encouraging that having her in that position might mean that the RINOs could very soon become extinct?
If there's better solution to bring Constitutional accountability back to the Republican Party, I cannot imagine what it'd be.
Jeff, you make a really good point that having her in that position might mean the RINO's could soon become extinct. She would not tolerate that, and though I know she's been accused of endorsing "RINO's" by many of her supporters, I've always thought that she is being pragmatic in some cases, and endorsing the candidate who is the most conservative who can also WIN.
ReplyDeleteJust wrote and published my post, so finally got it up. Linked today.
Have a great day, my friend.
Thanks for the luv, Pup!
ReplyDelete