"I spent eight years defending George W. Bush from attacks that remind me of those against Sarah Palin."

Both these ambushes convinced me that leftists' characters were too poor to ever be trusted with power.

Hawkins: There's only one Sarah Palin and there's not another soul on the national stage who can even come close to filling her high heels.

This is what scares me. Not too long ago the Netherlands had a prominent conservative politician who fit this description, and who had the same knack for rallying people around him as Palin does. You may have heard of him. His name was Pim Fortuyn, and when he was murdered, he proved to be irreplaceable as no other Dutch politician was capable of taking up his mantle, and so the following he had developed soon died with him.

Palin may be able to rally the GOP around her, either as their presidential nominee or in more of a behind-the-scenes role. But as long as she is as irreplaceable as Fortuyn was, her following will be just as vulnerable, for there's no telling if/when someone will see fit to move beyond mere character assassination.

Why are you a big fan of Sarah Palin? Seriously. OK -- a good looking woman who shoots well is an intrinsic joy. But other than that.

Politicos from Alaska always are suspect because, well, it's a welfare state. Everyone there gets checks from the government for the extraction of resources they did nothing to create or nurture. That peculiar economic distortion really hurts their ability to propose that they have relevant experience for governing other places.

I just don't see her as being all that libertarian when the rubber hits the road.

Fritz,

You need to approach it from a different direction. Suppose the Alaskan Government had just spent the money and not given it to the people?

Or think of where we would be re: oil independence if every American got a yearly oil royalty check?

And yes. Palin is not Libertarian Party libertarian.

Which IMO is a good thing.

Considering the people the LP is nominating these days, I would agree with you about "Libertarian Party libertarian".

I just don't see what she has done to cut the size of government or get the government out of people's personal lives.

"Politicos from Alaska always are suspect because, well, it's a welfare state. Everyone there gets checks from the government for the extraction of resources they did nothing to create or nurture. That peculiar economic distortion really hurts their ability to propose that they have relevant experience for governing other places."
Thats a somewhat narrow view. After all its just a State government who found a way to return to its citizens some recompense for the Alaskan lifestyle.
Arnold in "KaliFornia" had better start looking at all that oil bubbling offshore in Santa Barbara.

Alaskans had better hope they can start getting annual checks for methane hydrate leases before the oil fields give out. Otherwise the "Alaskan lifestyle" is going to get a bit dicey.

Palin is no Joan d'Arc, fellas. Project your wishes all you want but you can't make a great leader out of a mixed bag like Sarah.
She will fight for capitalism & freedom by what, confiscating oil company profits and distributing them to average Joe's pockets, at the expense of the rightful owners, the stockholders?
This woman is little more than an old fashioned muck-raking populist.
Her personal appeal notwithstanding, can anyone find the bedrock of principles this woman stands on other than Right to Life?

Or maybe that's the point. She's a political tabula rasa to be manipulated & guided by libertarian handlers.

A state with so much income from wise resource use that it even gives a tidy cut to the citizens quite frankly does NOT sound like an example to turn away from! Idealogy alone uber alles ain't the way to go when you're dealing with living, breathing humans to whom that cash will mean great material benefit and 'quality of life.' It won't go on forever, what institution does? (Imagine a USA with enough income from Solar Power Satellites to pay back its "astronomical" debt and distribute the profits to all taxpayers.) Add to this some of Alaska's freedom in personal areas and it looks to me to be a state trying to move in right directions, with the caveat of always remaining eagle-eyed for corruption in high places. Which brings the topic full circle to the former governor who rose as a corruption-fighter.

From Simon: "I just don't see what she has done to cut the size of government or get the government out of people's personal lives". Well, if you looked for more than 10 seconds you may have found this:
Governor Murkowski's last budget FY2007: $11,697,400,000

Governor Palin's latest budget FY2010: $10,570,000,000

A general rule of thumb for both liberal and conservative administrations is to claim that they may reasonably increase spending every year at a rate of 2% to 3% because of inflation and that should not count against them as increased spending. Even if we use the low end of inflation at 2%, Governor Palin's budget could have been (without calling it a spending increase): $12,413,374,459.20

Of course, the budget is not $12.4 billion; it is actually $10.57 billion. In other words, she cut spending.