Wednesday, October 22, 2008

Hillary Clinton: No Sarah Palin

Mistakes made, lessons learned in the 2008 Campaign . . .

Karen [a friend]: At one point in the JustSayNoDeal atmosphere I gave a ringing endorsement to Sarah Palin. I was told by a Hillaryite that by praising Sarah Palin so highly I had upset her because, by comparison, I'd made HRC look bad. Actually, I said nothing about Hillary Clinton, whom I admit I don't believe is in the same league as Sarah Palin.

Let me be frank: HRC is obviously a Party first person. Sarah Palin is country first.

Your comment about the "maverick" (i.e., naive) political participants is accurate. Frankly, the hundreds of thousands of hours spent on "Denver" and on wild flailing at Obama were a gigantic waste of time and money. The time expended on Denver should have been spent organizing -- and raising money -- to defeat Obama.

Sen. Clinton and her husband, both labelled racists (and worse) by Obama, have been out campaigning for their tormentor. The excuse given is that Sen. Clinton "has to do what she has to do." I compare that to Dosteoevsky's comment that, "If God is dead, everything is permitted." As long as someone like HRC is held to no standards, she "lives up" to that just fine.

One reason I like Sarah Palin so much is that she is not -- and will never become -- a Washington insider. She is incorruptible and totally fearless. The Hillary Supporters who have faced up to reality (and it is horrifying to say the least) will be great allies. The ones who remain in fantasy land would be no help to us.

You raise a point that Chris, Katie, and I have not discussed; the crying need for political training -- basically, to acquaint people with what works and what doesn't. Also, we need to inform people about how to build small organizations into large ones.

As for bloggers, they can be great assets. At times, however, we sounded like the second coming of the Tower of Babel. At our worst, we were all trying to produce a "knockout" (one more juicy expose) but generally didn't lay a glove on BHO. The birth-certificate non-issue was a classic case. I doubt 1% of the voters can identify the name "Raila Odinga." Michelle Obama's Princeton thesis is of interest to almost no one.

What are Americans interested in? And of even more importance, what are they NOT interested in? I asked people many time to be brutally realistic with themselves, but that message didn't get across to many.

We also need to coalesce around a specific candidate. I've said I hope that will be Sarah Palin, but I'm open to other names (if there are some).

1 comment:

Kahleeka said...

Why is it that people won't even CONSIDER looking into ANYTHING potentially negative about Obama? I was such a follower of him initially until I did the research - critical thinking! WHERE is that in today's society?