The worst is judging the not-so-good: That’s what Attorney General Eric Holder would have you believe.
Yes, the worst attorney general in our history contends that Sarah Palin wasn’t a very good vice presidential nominee. Mark one up again for the liberals' war on women.
“She wasn't a particularly good vice presidential candidate,” the AG told George Stephanapolous on ABCNews. “She's an even worse judge of who ought to be impeached and why.”
We’ve known for a while that Holder knows little about the law, now we know that he knows little about politics too.
He’s wrong on the law and he’s wrong the politics as well.
How does he hold his job again?
That Holder’s an impeachment target too, and perhaps a more likely one than Obama, doesn’t help his case.
Ask yourself: How did Al Gore make his money? What did Geraldine Ferraro do after Mondale lost his campaign? When was the last failed vice presidential candidate to have a bestseller? Or a movie made about them?
Sarah Palin was an excellent choice as a running mate.
Liberals and establishment Republicans often ask me: "What was John McCain thinking when he selected Sarah Palin?" To which I reply: "What was anyone thinking when they voted for Obama?"
That an unprepared black man is better than a more qualified woman? Who exactly is waging the war on women?
For a person who has been so vilified by the press, Palin's judgment has proven more often right than wrong.
If John McCain could borrow an ounce of common sense from Palin, he’d be president today. About the only thing that brought conservatives out for McCain was the Palin selection.
And in that judgment I’m sustained by the massive success Palin has had on the American stage. In my lifetime, no American politician has quite captured the attention that Sarah Palin has. Liberals hate her, but can’t stop talking about her; Conservatives love her and won’t stop talking about her; and she makes the establishment nervous, and don't want to talk about her at all. She has, despite having no political skills or smarts-- as liberals would have you believe-- run circles around the political elite in both Washington, DC and Alaska.
She's the pink elephant in the room.
If you look at what she accomplished in Alaska, there was a reason she was so popular. She ran roughshod on the frozen tundra over the political elite from both parties, and reformed politics there.
Like Ronald Reagan did, she knows how to appeal over the heads of the elite and the media, straight to the American people.
In my opinion, that’s one reason she would have made-- still could make-- an excellent president of the United States.
Far better than Eric Holder, Barack Obama, John McCain, Mitt Romney, Jeb Bush and a host of names which liberals would treat with more seriousness right up until they got the nomination.
Palin also has the advantage of knowing who she is.
That’s an advantage when confronting progressives, who, whatever else you might say, are certainly more committed ideologically than the establishment GOP is.
That Palin is willing to talk about impeachment—Obama or Holder doesn’t matter-- is a strength, not a weakness. In the short run it might be seen as pandering to the base, but ultimately, when the history of the Obama administration is written, it will be apparent that Palin, once again, got it right.
And after all, we pay a president to get decisions right. That’s the key to being an effective executive over the long haul. It’s a quality that has been noticeably lacking in the White House for a while.
Biographer David McCollough said that Truman was often the only one who knew what he was talking about on the national stage, yet Truman was reviled by the elite establishment who put him down as insignificant, just as they do Palin.
But Palin possesses such knowledge as Harry Truman.
It’s called common sense.
Eric Holder does not.
He’s a horse’s ass and a sophisticate.
If it weren’t for sophistry guys like Holder would have to make their way in the world on reality.
I’m thinking Palin has too much common sense to run for president of the United States, but if she does, I think Palin-Paul 2016 seems about right.
Just ask anyone in the media or at the RNC.
Their derision will tell you I'm right.