Here’s the real problem, Palin advocates. NiceDeb says she’s wondering whether Palin is truly electable: her fans are passionate, but so are her critics. Can she tip the balance?
Not without full-fledged support from the conservative base, she can’t. And she doesn’t have it yet. For instance, she doesn’t have my support. As I mentioned in the thread below, I like a lot of things about Sarah Palin. But I’m not convinced that she’s Presidential material, particularly with regard to her grasp of policy.
So, here’s your challenge. Convince me. Explain to me why she is in fact a qualified candidate for President – why her understanding of policy is strong and coherent, and why her vision for America is practical and promising. Or, if you’d rather, explain why it doesn’t matter. But don’t waste your time talking about how:
- “She’s the only real conservative”
- “She’s genuine and a straight shooter”
- “She’s tough and strong”
- “She gets things done”
I already know and appreciate these things. My concern lies with her handle on policy. I’ll give you an example.
Sarah Palin used the term “death panels,” and the liberal press (and administration) went nuts. It was fun to watch, but I was troubled by the way she handled it. When she first wrote about it, she said:
The Democrats promise that a government health care system will reduce the cost of health care, but as the economist Thomas Sowell has pointed out, government health care will not reduce the cost; it will simply refuse to pay the cost. And who will suffer the most when they ration care? The sick, the elderly, and the disabled, of course. The America I know and love is not one in which my parents or my baby with Down Syndrome will have to stand in front of Obama’s “death panel” so his bureaucrats can decide, based on a subjective judgment of their “level of productivity in society,” whether they are worthy of health care. Such a system is downright evil.
OK, Thomas Sowell is correct – care rationing and limiting care to the cheapest options (per the Comparative Effectiveness “Advisory” Panels) are inevitable consequences to the Obamacare system. People will certainly die as a result of the Comparative Effectiveness Panels’ “recommendations” (which will quickly become de facto mandates), so there are your “death panels.” So far so good – even the very controversial “level of productivity in society” makes some sense.
But when Palin was challenged, she started talking about the Advance Care Planning Consultation provision in the bill (which was recently wished to the cornfields). That provision certainly had the potential to be abused, but it had nothing to do with care rationing or decisions on treatments. And that gave the Left enough ammo to declare that Palin was either ignorant or a liar.
She had them dead to rights, and then wandered off message, as if she never really understood what the message was. And that really, really troubles me.
So. Teach me. Comfort me. Make me believe.