Leftists Just Don't Get it;"Palin For President 2016" Doesn't Necessarily Mean Palin For President 2016, Rather, Palin-ism In The Presidency 2016

Subsequent to the Los Angeles Times major article proposing Sarah Palin as "the Cure" for the GOP and it's suggestion that Palin may be an ideal candidate for 2016
there have been howls of derision from the left.

That is to be expected in Los Angeles of course, the unexpected however was the article itself. Amongst the huge number of leftist criticisms was a recurring theme that has been running for two years now. It has numerous variants, but in sum if runs along these lines "Palin is an egotist/She will drag out the "will she won't she" run game for four years whilst getting suckers to send her money" and suchlike.

Leaving aside that the decision to run for president is a momentous one, not only for a candidate but for their family.
As Palin knows, probably more than anyone. A merciless and unfair blowtorch is immediately focused on the candidate and anyone associated with them. Thus if Palin takes a long time to come to a decision, only a poltroon would condemn her for that.

The arrogance of the left is such that they consider that anyone who supports Sarahpac financially is a dumb sucker.
Obviously Palin supporters are well aware she may not run when they send money to Sarahpac. They do know that the money will go towards supporting candidates for office that Palin approves of. They also know it will not go towards "supporting Palin's extravagant lifestyle" and other such childish leftist idiocies.

Those who support Palin obviously would like her to run, but we obviously know that she may not.When we support her, in the media, or financially, or on the ground when her chosen candidates run we are supporting Palin-ism. Obviously we would like to see Palin-ism put in to effect by Palin herself, but if that is not to be, then seeing it effected by people she supports will also do. For us it is money and time well spent.

The leftist cynics can simply go to hell.

I addressed this matter before the Los Angeles Times article and reproduce it below as a supplement to the new commentary above.


This site is not absolutely about Sarah Palin regardless of the Blog title. Of course I, and I am sure a massive number of others, judging by her Facebook followers being over 3 million, would wish her to run in 2016.

But Palin is only one person, and a person with massive family commitments, especially with Trig of course. It may be that she has developed a taste for the freedom from financial constraints and from media criticism worries, and is happy to enjoy the rest of her life in comfort and ease.

If so, good for her. Surely nobody else in public life has endured the slings and arrows of outrageous leftism over the last four years and would be entitled to such a respite as her skills and endurance has gained for her.

There are of course many options for public involvement open to her. She will be in demand as public speaker for some time yet as an historic figure at least.

The currently Dem. held Alaskan senate seat is up for election in 2016, and of course she can continue endorsing and campaigning for candidates she considers it important to do so. Her influence as an endorser is undiminished as e.g Ted Cruz in Texas will testify.

But even if none of these options appeal to her (which I doubt) this blog would change from Palin4President2016 to "Palinism In The Presidency 2016". No matter how great or influential and correct a person's political, social and economic  ideas and ideals are, they will outlive their originator if they have lasting value.

The "common sense conservatism" policies that Sarah Palin espouses and exemplifies, are lasting if not timeless and will be her legacy no matter what her personal future holds. An outline of  what she, and this site stands for are
AT THIS LINK

In the meantime, unless or until Palin herself  advises she will cease any activism which might lead her to make a run for office, the blog title will stay as it is. Should she decide to leave the political scene then a simple change of emphasis from the person to the policies the person espoused will suffice.