New Contact Email

adambrickley.brickyard@blogspot.com

Thursday, July 10, 2008

Praise from The American Thinker, mention by Tom DeLay

Richard Baehr of The American Thinker has a great article out today titled "How McCain Could Win", and Sarah Palin is a major part of his strategy:

"So who would help the ticket most as a VP selection? One interesting choice would be Alaska's very popular Governor, Sarah Palin. She would be an immediate media sensation and rob the Obama campaign of its monopoly of saturation media infatuation. Given the way the media was perceived to have ganged up on Hillary Clinton, there might be much greater care about avoiding doing it again with Palin. Of course Palin would be challenged for her youth and inexperience in foreign policy matters. But the reality is that Palin, unlike almost all US Senators (including Barack Obama), has actually run something, and with 84% approval for her job as Governor, seems to be running it well. Jimmy Carter, Michael Dukakis and Bill Clinton all ran for President directly from service as Governor. Raising the experience issue with Palin would be a risky strategy for the Obama campaign. After all, Palin would only be running for the #2 spot, and Obama, with arguably less of a track record, is running for the top spot. Palin would also be very effective in helping focus the energy issue, and the need to explore and drill for what we have in this country. She could take McCain to ANWR and give him reason to shift on that issue."

Former House Majority Leader Tom DeLay also mentioned Palin last night on Hardball with Chris Matthews, stating that he thinks she is on McCain's list of potential running mates. Here's an excerpt from the transcript:

MATTHEWS: Do you think it is possible that McCain will overcome his distaste for Mitt Romney and put him on the ticket and win this thing by going into those states that the Democrats use own Pennsylvania, Ohio, Michigan?

DELAY: I think it is very possible. I think Romney is certainly the top leader right now on the list. There‘s some—the governor of Alaska is around there somewhere.



35 comments:

Anonymous said...

Hey guys, big article on John McCain touting Gov Palin as his best vp choice. On realclearpolitics, by a guy named Beahr. Here's the link.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/07/how_mccain_could_win.html
dr. vicki

Anonymous said...

Oops, sorry, I see it's the same article Adam got his quote from. But you can read the whole thing at that link. It's pretty interesting.

Kristofer said...

I have to admit, I am not a Tom Delay fan, but this is big news for our movement.

Delay's is essentially saying that Palin is an acceptable pick for Party insiders, and although he was unable to run for re-election due to "legal" reasons, he still remains one of the most powerful GOP insiders.

I usually take what Ted (our Ted) says with a "grain of salt", but he might be correct. It may be between Romney and Palin.

Romney - The known/predictable pick
Palin - Out-of-the-box Pick

Ted said...

Thanks Kris, it WAS down to Mitt or Sarah.

But, clearly, now, McCain's gotta forget Romney. Mitt's a net neutral AT BEST. (negatives approximate the positives)

McCain's gotta (and I'm now convinced WILL) go for the gusto: Palin! McCain's gotta know that Palin's positives are off the chart (with no real negatives whatsoever).

Anonymous said...

I don't mean to upset anyone by this comment. It is just a fact. Many evangelicals, especially in the South, are taught in their churches that Mormonism is a heretic religion. I myself taught a class in religious movements, such as New Age, Islaam, Hari Krishna, etc. Mormonism was included in the curriculum. It wasn't necessarily meant to brand it as an "evil" religion, but that it didn't follow some of the basic tenets of evangelical Christianity. Add to that the polygamist fringe sects of Mormonism that are a huge turnoff to women, I think Romney is a net loss for McCain. I think it gives him no chance of picking up the disenfranchised Hillary voters. Fundraising would be a big plus of choosing Romney but I'm not sure if that matters since Sen McCain is going with the public financing. Maybe one of you other bloggers can shed some light on that.
dr. vicki

Joshua Lawson said...

Very interesting indeed. The buzz is clearly building for Palin. She's becoming more and more a likely possibility every day it seems. Good to see.

Anonymous said...

If Palin is the one, when should he announce?

Maybe right after the Governors Conference this weekend?

Or, the day the People magazine with Sarah hits? Big splash as people scramble to get info. on her.

Before Dems convention, after, or just before Repub convention?

Carlos Echevarria said...

If Mac picks the GOP Wonder Woman, I would love to see how the B.Hussein Obama campaign comes after her???

She has more experience than he does and she would only be the VP...Moreover, their mysoginist tendencies would come to play again and further move erstwhile Clintonistas into our camp!!!!

McCain-Palin 08'

Anonymous said...

dr. vicki, I agree that Mitt Romney is a net loss for McCain. I don't care if some people think the Mormon religion is a cult or whatever, but I DO care that the religion seems to be heavy on patriarchy.

Would Romney, if President, appoint women to his cabinet, to the bench, and other leadership positions in the federal government?

I'm sure I'm not the only woman who has this concern if a Mormon is elected to the POTUS.

Joshua Lawson said...

If I were McCain, and selecting Palin as VP, I would announce it one full day after Obama's pretentious and condescending Invesco Field nomination speech. Kill the momentum, drive the news cycle, and watch Team Obama squirm over how to attack back.

Kristofer said...

Actually Mitt Romney has a net -12 popularity rating. He is a drag, not a "wash" for McCain.

Joshua is on to something, I would wait until after Obama makes his selection or just after the DNC convention.

If McCain is going to pick an outsider like Palin (Big headlines), then he needs to use it to off-set a big Obama moment.

Ted said...

I'd advise McCain to announce Palin right now!

It's a story that's gonna keep on giving and giving and giving to the McCain campaign! (won't get old by the convention or November, will only grow as people learn about Palin)

The two of them should appear around the country as sort of a tag team!

(The one and only caveat is that this be done in a way not to interfere with Palin's Alaska Natural Gas Pipeline initiative, which should be up for a vote by the Alaska State legislature momentarily.)

Kristofer said...

Adam,

when will the vote be? I believe the Alaska Leg. just reconvened.

Don't forget to push the video everyone! :)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TXfiOSCfY44

Ted said...

And don't forget to push this as the Sarah Palin Veep theme song at the Republican National Convention later this summer.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EWNtLt-pJik

(Come hell or high water, I'm gonna be there and witness this!)

Anonymous said...

I agree with Ted. I think sooner is better than later. I think she is the type of candidate that the more people get to know her, the more likable she is. I think if they wait until the convention, her story won't have time to get out. I also think picking Palin almost makes it impossible for Obama to pick Hillary as his running mate. He'd look like he's either pandering or desperate. I, myself, was a Hillary gal, but not very democrat. I'm pretty sure some of "us" will go back to BO if he puts her on the ticket. Sen. McCain needs to take that off the table if he can.
I also agree with the writer of the article, that Sen McCain should one by one announce cabinet members. For example, if he had a good spot for Huckabee. I think seeing Huckabee get a good spot would bring in a lot of his loyal voters. I think it shows respect. I think it is also a very shrewd counterbalance to the "unknownness" of Obama, which I believe is his key weakness, not really knowing that much about him and what direction he will end up going in.
But, I don't know much about politics, so when I say my 2 cents worth, that's really what it's worth.
dr. vicki

Anonymous said...

Anonymous--Abe Lincoln, the first GOP president, had most of his rivals in his cabinet such as Seward (yes, the Alaska one of Seward's Folly and target of the Booth conspiracy). Romney could be Secretary of State--a better job than veep for sure.

Anonymous said...

I agree that mormonism could hurt the ticket in certain states, but as to the patriarchy issue, Romney did have a woman as his Lt.Gov in MA so I don't know if that really comes into play.

But even if only 10% of evangelicals would be put off by having a mormon on the ticket, and I imagine the number would actually bea bit higher, that could do serious damage in a bunch of states.

Also, the Mormon Church's less than enlightened history with blacks wouldn't exactly help things with Obama as the opponent and the media pushing the racial angle and attemptong to brand anyone who opposes him a racist.

There's a bunch of other reasons besides the mormon thing though to thin Romney might not be the best choice. That said, he's still probably at the top of the list and also has a lot of things going for him.

If McCain does pick Palin, I nominate Ted as her chief of staff.

ginger said...

During the four years that Romney was gov a report from a suny at Albany policy group said Mass had more women at the top levels of government than any other state.
Chief of staff
head of legislative affairs
Secretary of Housing
secretary of Labor
head of consumer relations
Secretary of the environment
head of Medicaid
and the list goes on and on. So your issue with him should not be the appt of women. I am sure you can find another reason.

Go Palin!!!

ginger said...

P.S. Data will always set you free. something that sometimes seems lacking from posts on lots of blogs. One would think that will all the info online people would do some fact-checking before they type.

Anonymous said...

He may not have picked his Lt. Gov. In some states they run a separate campaign. Which is kind of weird, you can actually have a gov. and Lt. gov. from different parties.
After thinking about it, I can see Romney being offered a cabinet position instead of vp if Palin were to be offered vp, because (okay, I'm picking on the guys here) Romney would have a shot at a presidential nomination after McCain because admittedly it might be quite a leap for the republican party to nominate a woman for top slot of their presidential ticket. So, he might would prefer a strong cabinet position if his perception of the vp pick was that she would not necessarily be a front runner in 2012.
Just a thought.
dr vicki

ginger said...

in mass the gov and lg are nominated separately. However Ronney wanted Kerry Healey and worked tirelessly to have her be the nominee by campaigning all over the state when she faced a primary opponent.

Kristofer said...

dr vicki,

"might be quite a leap for the republican party to nominate a woman for top slot of their presidential ticket"

That is what they said in England 30 years ago when they elected Thatcher. In the 1970's the British Conservatives were much more, uhm...."traditional" than the modern GOP.

If the GOP views Palin as a winner, they will vote for her. Do not doubt that.

In fact, I would argue that the Democrats showed this year, it "might be quite a leap" for a woman.

If the situations were reversed and Clinton were in the GOP primary, running against an under-qualified male, she would have won.

Ted said...

At this point, no leap at all for a GOP woman VP OR Pres (right after McCain). If anything, it's the thing to do.

And, yes, I'd discuss serving as VP Palin's Chief of Staff.

Anonymous said...

Ginger, as a psychologist this is a fact I will share with you. Young adult Mormons, particularly women, have one of the highest rates of suicide of any subgroup in the U.S. Utah declared it's suicide rate to be "epidemic". Would this data come up in the campaign? I don't know. Does it have anything to do with the religion or is it some other cultural phenomenon? I don't know.
My point was that for many Americans, Mormonism is an unknown, so in selecting Romney as vp, you would have to sell the public on the idea that Mormonism is mainstream along with convincing folks he's a good pick. I think one of the most "marketable" features of the McCain campaign is that people "get him". That is his best contrast with Obama who seems very mysterious. I just read his book, Faith of our Fathers. It's so American, he feels about America the way I think most of us wish we could. Gov Palin, I think, is the same kind of gal. You get her. She's the all American, girl next door. You won't always agree with her, but she's solid. I don't have strong feelings about his Mormon faith one way or the other, I just think it adds the element of "mystery" to the ticket that McCain is better off avoiding. McCain needs to go as red, white and blue, apple pie, hot dogs as he can.

Anonymous said...

I don't know, fellas. I look at guys like Cheney and I just have a hard time believing they would go for a woman republican president. Republicans are pretty behind dems in electing women to national office. It makes women such as myself question whether there aren't a number of men in the ranks who still hold some chauvanistic views about leadership. I'm not big on affirmative action at all, but when I worked for public schools, we tried really hard to hire male teachers for the elementary schools. We felt kids needed the role models. Maybe the Republican party needs to do a little proactive nominating. Seek out more opportunities to put women and minorities in leadership. I have to say I get pretty miffed about all the ink that Jindal gets compared to Palin because I certainly can't see much difference between the two. Maybe it has more to do with Alaska being sort of remote as opposed to their gender. But you gotta wonder.
dr. vicki

Anonymous said...

Dr. Vicki,

I think that may have been the case a couple elections ago, but with Margaret Thatcher being an example, plus the popularity of Hillary, I think the leaders of the Republicans by now have some clue if not a clear view that they better reach out to minorities and women and FAST.

This Palin grassroots movement is needed to get these upper-crusties looking at her. Once they look, pretty soon guys like Kristol notice, then DeLay notices, etc.

McCain may go for the establishment pick and if he does, he'll lose absent the non-existent Michelle tape.

But, if he doesn't pick Palin and he loses, the Roves of the world will take notice, and not having a woman on the ticket and how it hurts will be noticed at some point.

I laugh at the postings that show "Jindal/Palin - 2012". Palin is a more experienced and more capable LEADER than the 8 years younger Jindal. "Palin/Jindal - 2012" is more like it.

Laura said...

ginger, that's good to hear that Romney had women in leadership positions in his administration.

But you don't have to check much data to learn that the Mormon religion is patriarch-centered. The perception that women have a subservient role in the Mormon church that will hurt McCain if Romney is the VP.

Anonymous said...

NO----Senator McCain must NOT select his VP until AFTER the Dems do. Anyone who suggests otherwise might be a Dem mole (and I'm not assuming you are one, Ted).

The smartest way to select a VP is to wait as long as possible, even until the actual Rep. convention. The bump resulting in the polls is huge!

Never fear: Americans will learn about Sarah Palin and her intelligent NORMALCY in plenty of time to vote for her.

If Gov. Palin is nominated----but particularly if it's before the Dems' selection and/or VP nomination----do NOT underestimate the wrath of Hillary's supporters and the Dems in general. They WILL attempt to slice Gov. Palin to shreds; every detail of her life will be analyzed to death.

I literally ache for Gov. Palin, who will be under immense pressure to give in and take the VP slot in order to "serve" Americans----even though so many Americans are viciously ungrateful to our leaders.

Ted said...

Dr. vicki, I more than assure you that Republican Cheney-loving men LOVE TOUGH AS NAILS/NO NONSENSE WOMEN -- exactly like Sarah Palin (or exactly like Cheney's own wife, Lynn Cheney, for that matter, who, by the way I recommend for Secretary of Education in the McCain/Palin administration.

And in the McCain/Palin administration, domestic initiative #1 is school choice (encourage school vouchers at state and local levels).)

Anonymous said...

So, Ted, this is a serious question, not a sarcastic one, why so you think there are relatively few Republican women in Congress? I think part of why Gov Palin isn't getting ink is in part because the MSM just assumes the repubs will go with a man.
dr vicki

Ted said...

dr. vicki,

First of all the first ever female member of Congress was Margaret Chase Smith of the GOP, both a US Rep and US Senator from Maine.

And there are currently female GOP Senators Dole, Hutchinson, Murkowski. And here in Massachusetts, we long ago (before the Dems) had GOP Congresswoman Heckler).

But in answer to your question, the simple answer is that female GOP members of Congress have gotten there IN SPITE OF BEING WOMEN, whereas Dem members of Congrss have gotten there largely PRECISELY BECAUSE THEY ARE WOMEN.

You'll note that the great world leaders who've been women are largely conservatives, Maggie Thatcher, Golda Mier, Merkel of Germany, etc.

And, similarly, the first female US Veep and President will be a Republican -- they got there in spite of being women, not because they were women.

Ted said...

And dr. vicki, Palin is getting little or no ink in the main stream media (which is actually the liberal/Dem/Obama-loving MSM) PRECISELY BECAUSE THEY ARE DEATHLY AFRAID OF HER. (The just want Palin to go away, pretending she's not there -- which is the exact inverse of how formidable she will be in the election.)

Kristofer said...

Dr. V is correct. The GOP has a serious issue with attracting women. This will change dramatically for two reasons.

#1 - Campaign finance reform. Women will now be able to complete for political positions without needing to be part of the "old boys club"

#2 - Society is changing. Universities are unable to find an equal number of qualified male applicants. This new generation of women will surpass men in business and politics.

As well, women are getting married at an older age and having children later in life. Many of these middle class, family oriented, career women have voted Republican (but have been made to feel that they had to choose between family and politics), but their new social status will allow them to continue to succeed in business and politics. In fact, I believe I read in business week that more than 50% of all new start-up business are lead/owned by women.

What the GOP needs is one women to break the glass ceiling, and after that, I think we will see big changes. Palin just might be it.

Oh, and on Cheney...he is yesterday's news. He holds zero power now, and none of the young Republicans in Congress follow him anymore.

flapper said...

I read the transcript from the "Hardball" segment and it's pretty obvious that Chris Matthews wants Romney as the VP nominee. The other liberal from NBC news was pushing Tom Ridge.

I wonder why?

D.E said...

A few points here. First, John McCain must select Sarah Palin BEFORE Barack Obama makes his choice because he can not allow Obama to have the opportunity to pick a woman before him, because if he does, then McCain will look like he's pandering. Secondly, the positives far outweigh the negatives in selecting Palin first. One, Barack Obama's biggest flaw is that he has no experience. No foreign policy experience, no executive experience, and very little legislative experience. Therefore, he has to pick someone with some of those qualities, like a Joe Biden or something like that. If McCain picks a woman first, it puts Obama in a bind because he has to select someone that can compliment his weaknesses but the only woman in the Democratic Party that can do that is Hillary Clinton. If he picks her after McCain picks Palin, it will look like that is the only reason he picked her because everyone knows that he didn't want her, which will have to upset the Clinton loyalists. If he picks a woman other than Clinton, her supporters will feel insulted because she got screwed out of yet another position that she was qualified for and If he still picks a man, the "sexist" narrative against Obama among Clinton supporters will still continue and all of her still-on-the-fence supporters will come right to McCain. Now, on the other hand, if McCain waits, then he will have to react and that's not a good place for him to be in.


As far as the Republican Party not supporting a female for the top of the ticket, that couldn't be farther from the truth. The nation's first female senator (and, ironically, the co-founder of the ACLU) was a Republican. The first black female Secretary of State was a Republican. The list goes on and on. Are there some beltway boys that would disapprove of it? Of course they would. There are racists and sexists in the GOP just like there are in the Democratic Party. No one is immune from a few bad apples. But I believe that the G.O.P would overwhelmingly support a woman (or an African-American for that matter) as the leader of their party. The problem is not that the G.O.P won't elect women, it's that they need more of them. The party doesn't have enough women, African-Americans, or Hispanics in high ranking positions because we don't have enough of them in the Party. That's the only issue. The coalition needs to be expanded. But I wholeheartedly believe that if a woman, hispanic, or african-american was qualified and could win, the G.O.P would support them. Remember that the Republican Party BEGGED both Colin Powell and Condi Rice to run because they knew that they could win.