I've remained pretty quiet about Palin as a politician b/c I've been absorbing the madness surrounding her rise to fame. I've also been listening intently to her when she speaks. I read her memoir, as you know; and I've now watched all her recent one-on-one interviews with the folks at FOX, which were very in-depth and unbiased, naturally. And here's the thing:
There's something missing with Palin -- and believe me, it pains me to say this. God knows the Republican party needs a leader, and of course I agree with Palin on many fronts. The problem with Palin is that all of her answers come in the form of generalizations about political philosophy. Generalizations that, quite frankly, I could make.
To some degree, as I've said before, I believe Palin is setting herself up as "one of us": a regular Joe(anne) as opposed to a big shot. And I like this about her -- in theory. But I also need my politicians to know more than I do, and I don't believe Palin does.
That is not to say she couldn't be an effective leader. Reagan was no intellectual either, but he surrounded himself with the right people. And, to be honest, the president doesn't need to have all the answers. Sometimes being an effective leader is knowing how to delegate.
Bottom line: I would welcome Sarah Palin on the political scene in all kinds of positions, but I wouldn't vote for her for president unless I was up against the wall and had no other options. Palin may be a viable option down the road, but she has a lot of work to do to ready herself for any kind of major role.
Dated: 4:00 AM