For a silly hick snowbilly who doesn’t know anything, whom loving and tolerant liberals call a “special needs case” in honor of the new civility, Sarah Palin is establishing a track record on the issues that is, over the past year or two, without equal.
On Libya, Palin saw that indecision and lack of clear leadership would not do any good. We had to be in it to win it.
So what our president said at first, that our mission is to see Qaddafi go, he’s got to go, but then we’re told by one of his top advisers, the president’s top advisers, saying, well, no, really, Qaddafi is probably going to prevail on this. He’s probably going to prevail over the opposition. And then our president changes the tune again, saying, well, it’s not our mission to oust Qaddafi. A lot of confusion.
I would like to see, of course, as long as we’re in it — we better be in it to win it. And if there’s doubt, we get out. Win it means Qaddafi goes and America gets to get on out of there and let the people of Libya create their own government, choose their own leader. And America, no nation building. We get out. We take care of our affairs elsewhere.
On the Fed’s quantitative easing, Palin didn’t think it would do any good. She has been proven right.
Unemployment is still high. Shakespeare couldn’t come up with a better plot. But how in the world did Mrs. Palin, who is supposed to be so thick, manage to figure all this out so far ahead of the New York Times and all the economists it talked to?
She did this back in November in a speech at Phoenix, which the Wall Street Journal, in a laudatory editorial at the time, characterized as zeroing in on the connection between a weak dollar and rising prices for oil and food. “We don’t want temporary, artificial economic growth brought at the expense of permanently higher inflation which will erode the value of our incomes and our savings,” the Journal quoted Mrs. Palin as saying. “We want a stable dollar combined with real economic reform. It’s the only way we can get our economy back on the right track.” Now here is the New York Times quoting a raft of economists who have reached the conclusion that Mrs. Palin’s warning was right down the line.
Sarah Palin was cautious on Egypt, wanting to know who was likely to take power before the US insisted that Mubarak leave. She has been forceful on China, warning that its military buildup is a threat.
Meanwhile, the cerebral president with the fancy pants creases just keeps getting everything wrong. Everything he touches turns to crap. Even her website is now better than his.
Whodathunkit?
Join the conversation as a VIP Member