Back Home in Alaska, Palin Finds Cold Comfort

[Paper Trail]

Scrutiny Has Been Intense Since Election

By Michael Leahy
Washington Post Staff Writer

JUNEAU, Alaska -- A couple of weeks before the Alaska legislature began this year's session, a bipartisan group of state senators on a retreat a few hours from here invited Gov. Sarah Palin to join them. Accompanied by a retinue of advisers, she took a seat at one end of a conference table and listened passively as Gary Stevens, the president of the Alaska Senate, a former college history professor and a low-key Republican with a reputation for congeniality, expressed delight at her presence.

Would the governor, a smiling Stevens asked, like to share some of her plans and proposals for the coming legislative session?

Palin looked around the room and paused, according to several senators present. "I feel like you guys are always trying to put me on the spot," she said finally, as the room became silent.

Gone was the self-assurance that Alaska had come to know in its young Republican governor, well before her life and career were transformed by Sen. John McCain's selection of her as his vice presidential running mate. "She looked ill at ease, more defensive than we've been accustomed to seeing her," said one legislator who was there and spoke on the condition of anonymity because he said he might need to work with Palin.

A number of factors seem to have contributed to the bumpy homecoming: a residual anger among Democrats for the attack-dog role Palin assumed in the McCain campaign, lingering resentment from Republicans for the part she may have played in McCain's defeat, and a suspicion crossing party lines that the concerns of Alaska, at a time of economic crisis, will now be secondary to her future in national politics.

Nearly every move that Palin makes or does not make, acknowledges Joe Balash, one of her closest aides, is analyzed through a new political prism, scrutinized for its effect on a possible 2012 presidential candidacy. "There's nothing we can do to stop it," he said. "People wonder why she's doing something or not doing something."

The result of all this scrutiny and second-guessing, says one Republican ally, is that "the governor has been feeling beaten up."

The lists of her doings and not doings include a growing leeriness of the media -- she declined requests for an interview for this article -- as she pursues an aggressive strategy on the national political front.

She has established a political action committee, SarahPAC, designed to fund her national appearances. She sat for a lengthy interview with a conservative documentarian exploring the reasons behind President Obama's election, during which she reiterated her belief that she was unflatteringly exploited by such TV personages as Katie Couric and Tina Fey, and suggested she was mishandled by the McCain campaign.

She has taken sides in a war for the soul of the newly beleaguered Republican Party in Texas, where that state's senior GOP senator, Kay Bailey Hutchison, plans to challenge Republican Gov. Rick Perry in a primary fight that may serve as an early indicator of social conservatives' strength in the GOP nationally. In a written statement, Palin said Perry "walks the walk of a true conservative. And he sticks by his guns -- and you know how I feel about guns."

Constantly asked about Palin's future, Balash says that she has no timetable for making up her mind about 2012 and that she hasn't even told him whether she'll run for reelection in 2010.

While her once sky-high job approval ratings in her home state have dropped a little, Palin is still liked by more than 60 percent of the Alaskan electorate, the sort of number that most politicians can only dream about. Still, the anonymous sniping that portrayed her during the campaign as a flighty and demanding running mate continues to resonate with some legislators. Among both Republicans and Democrats, the view persists that she and those closest to her have overstepped their authority on occasion.

[New York'rr]

Wow, a hit piece on Governor Palin in the Washington Post.

Who woulda thunk it?

Wonder if they have any resources in Washington DC these days, you know, to cover the one or two non-Alaska-related stories happening there lately.

[Kace]

Um...thanks, Zero?

[Lazlo Toth]

Palin post.

[tater]

Boy there's a lot of stories about a woman who is a governor of a far away state who lost the VP slot 3 months ago...and according to Pro the VP slot has nothing of real value anyway.

[Pro]

The office itself doesn't. The fact that the person holding it could become President does.

It's completely obvious to me that the reason she had no ideas for the next Alaska legislative session is that she had fully expected to be in DC and VPOTUS.

What does it take to appease the publicity seekers in every arena? The wanna be's? When the spotlight is no longer on them, they get an attitude.

[News Is Broken]

To me it just underscores that she wasn't "ready for prime-time" and that the voters made the right decision. Sorry if that's harsh. I'm sure she's a nice lady in person and at home. But politics ain't pattycake, and if you feel too beat up by it to be an effective leader, then maybe that's not the job for you.

[buckpasser]

Originally Posted by tater

Boy there's a lot of stories about a woman who is a governor of a far away state who lost the VP slot 3 months ago...and according to Pro the VP slot has nothing of real value anyway.

So you claim you voted, "pro Republican" not "anti-Obama"?

Not because of John McCain, but Sarah Palin? All those great ideas, and beliefs she had?

So you see a thread about this person you so admire. This person you feel so drawn to because of her views....

...and you show this admiration for Palin's ideas by wondering why people are even bring her up before telling the world what Pro thinks.

Yeah...you are a true conservative! "Stop talking about the people I like! Back to the people I hate!".

Sure thing, Tater. You aren't a fake conservative. Nah.

[tater]

Originally Posted by buckpasser

So you claim you voted, "pro Republican" not "anti-Obama"?

Not because of John McCain, but Sarah Palin? All those great ideas, and beliefs she had?

So you see a thread about this person you so admire. This person you feel so drawn to because of her views....

...and you show this admiration for Palin's ideas by wondering why people are even bring her up before telling the world what Pro thinks.

Yeah...you are a true conservative! "Stop talking about the people I like! Back to the people I hate!".

Sure thing, Tater. You aren't a fake conservative. Nah.

Actually I was playing off of one of Pro's earlier posts in another thread about the Vice President not really meaning anything....but rant on if it makes you feel better.

[Kace]

Actually I thought Pro's point is that the position's only purpose is to do tiebreaker votes in the Senate and be the backup QB in case the President goes bye-bye...which he felt could be filled in nicely by the Secretary Of State instead.

[tater]

Originally Posted by Kace

Actually I thought Pro's point is that the position's only purpose is to do tiebreaker votes in the Senate and be the backup QB in case the President goes bye-bye...which he felt could be filled in nicely by the Secretary Of State instead.

Hence the position doesn't really mean anything if you want it absorbed by somebody else.

[Delta Dawn]

Originally Posted by tater

rant on if it makes you feel better.

That wasn't a rant. That was a dagger.

[tater]

No that was a rant...this is a dagger.

[Kace]

I think the importance of it resonates with who that next-in-line person is and making sure said individual is competent enough to take over if need be.

[Delta Dawn]

Originally Posted by tater

No that was a rant...this is a dagger.

That's not a dagger. This is a dagger.



So's this:

Originally Posted by buckpasser

Sure thing, Tater. You aren't a fake conservative. Nah.

[Pro]

Originally Posted by Kace

Actually I thought Pro's point is that the position's only purpose is to do tiebreaker votes in the Senate and be the backup QB in case the President goes bye-bye...which he felt could be filled in nicely by the Secretary Of State instead.

Or combine the office, if you like...."Vice President and Secretary of State". You could still have the VP run on th same ticket with the President candidate. That way voters would know who'd be next in line, and that person would have some real, daily, mandated duties.

[Kace]

Pro, I'm gonna guess here that you feel the Vice Presidency basically bloats the size of Government a bit. That about right?

[tater]

Originally Posted by Pro

Or combine the office, if you like...."Vice President and Secretary of State". You could still have the VP run on th same ticket with the President candidate. That way voters would know who'd be next in line, and that person would have some real, daily, mandated duties.

So in a way Hillary Clinton IS the Vice President.

She's a genius.

[Pro]

Originally Posted by tater

So in a way Hillary Clinton IS the Vice President.

She's more powerful that the Vice President. As long as Barack Obama breathes.

But she doesn't get the free house. Perks aren't quite as good.

[buckpasser]

Originally Posted by tater

Actually I was playing off of one of Pro's earlier posts in another thread...

You. Were. "Playing off of one of Pro's earlier"

That's your problem, Tater. Your vote is based on a "play off" of Democrats. Your watch O'Reilly, who runs segments that "play off" what Democrats said.

There's another word for it, Tater. "Reactionary".

You react. You wait for someone on 'the other side' to say something you don't like, then you define that person as, 'wrong'.

If that person is wrong, and there's only two sides, you prove yourself right. By default. Without ever having to defend your own thoughts or ideas.


And that's why you vote Republican. It's easier. You can mold your identity around asking questions, and challenging people to tell you what they think. You can wait for Pro to post something you think is bad. Then you can prove Pro wrong, and win! Without having to give your own opinion.

Your opinion on Sarah Palin, who had the ideas you say drove you to vote on November 4th? Well...you were just reacting to Pro's words. Why take a chance on Sarah Palin's ideas when you can clam up and go with, "here's what Pro thinks".

That's why REpublicans are Republicans. They don't like taking chances. They seek a Party who are usually the minority. The question askers. The challengers. The rugged individualists who hold the government accountable.

And, finally, that's why Republicans in charge of the government was such a cluster. A mess. Oh. That was bad. But you don't put the question askers in charge of answering questions. You don't put movie critics in charge of making films.

[Sparky]

Originally Posted by Paper Trail

Constantly asked about Palin's future, Balash says that she has no timetable for making up her mind about 2012 and that she hasn't even told him whether she'll run for reelection in 2010.

Her plans for 2012? As in national political plans???? WTF??? Folks, this woman was toast the day after the election. Who thinks she'll be any less polarizing in the ensuing years when people will actually have the time to check her out. Of course, it will also give her time to figure out what newspapers she reads. Maybe she can co-star in a wacky comedy with Larry the Cable Guy called "Git "Er Done, Sarah's Gonna Run!"

[tater]

Originally Posted by buckpasser

You. Were. "Playing off of one of Pro's earlier"

That's your problem, Tater. Your vote is based on a "play off" of Democrats. Your watch O'Reilly, who runs segments that "play off" what Democrats said.

There's another word for it, Tater. "Reactionary".

You react. You wait for someone on 'the other side' to say something you don't like, then you define that person as, 'wrong'.

If that person is wrong, and there's only two sides, you prove yourself right. By default. Without ever having to defend your own thoughts or ideas.


And that's why you vote Republican. It's easier. You can mold your identity around asking questions, and challenging people to tell you what they think. You can wait for Pro to post something you think is bad. Then you can prove Pro wrong, and win! Without having to give your own opinion.

Your opinion on Sarah Palin, who had the ideas you say drove you to vote on November 4th? Well...you were just reacting to Pro's words. Why take a chance on Sarah Palin's ideas when you can clam up and go with, "here's what Pro thinks".

That's why REpublicans are Republicans. They don't like taking chances. They seek a Party who are usually the minority. The question askers. The challengers. The rugged individualists who hold the government accountable.

And, finally, that's why Republicans in charge of the government was such a cluster. A mess. Oh. That was bad. But you don't put the question askers in charge of answering questions. You don't put movie critics in charge of making films.

Are you still ranting Sean Hannity...you might be in need of a vacation.

[New York'rr]

Perhaps buckpasser can take a little break from his endless mindless ridiculously nonsensical rants about what Republicans think and explain why Joe Biden makes a good Vice President.



Because in the Democrat primaries, where Obama received more votes than Mrs. Bill Clinton and ended up taking the nomination, Biden received approximately 17 votes total. Out of ten million. But now this clown Joe Biden is second in line to the presidency. Say what you want about Governor Palin, but she has more executive experience than Obama and Biden combined. She also is more serious and wise about the way the world works than Obama and Biden combined. She is required to be, since she continues to live in the real world where she is answerable to her constituents, while Obama and Biden set new records for BSing the American people every day.



Of course, requesting that buckpasser actually explain something in the affirmative, or defend something, or edorse something, or make any statement which isn't another version of "Wepubwicans baaad!!! Baaaad! Whaaa! Whaaa! Whaaaa!" would probably be asking too much.

[Sultanosurf]

Originally Posted by Pro

Or combine the office, if you like...."Vice President and Secretary of State". You could still have the VP run on th same ticket with the President candidate. That way voters would know who'd be next in line, and that person would have some real, daily, mandated duties.

Jeez, if we can't even repair the antiquated electoral college, why would you mess with one revision that has made sense? Besides, wouldn't combining VP and Secy of State face an obvious practical limitation? State is by nature an international post, while the few actual procedural roles of VP involve being in D.C.

And besides Yorkie's vitriol, the Post article on Palin was hardly a hit piece. Lots of people around the nation don't hold to some's perception that she's a dim-bulb, and are interested in the woman. She remains the highest-profile Republican, topping any list of future candidates.