Palin Goes From Tea Partier, To Not So Much

Interesting. Via an email tip from RD. Didn't note this in my posting of Palin's stumping for Perry- where she looked far more at home than she did in Nashville btw.

The surprise, as in the new Rasmussen Reports survey of the GOP gubernatorial primary, is the growing strength of Debra Medina, a businesswoman active in the state’s Tea Party movement. Medina now edges White 41% to 38%. Last month, White had a 44% to 38% lead on her. In this contest, six percent (6%) favor some other candidate, but a more sizable 16% are undecided.

It looks like another instance where that $100k in so-called TP money Palin dropped in her PAC won't be supporting the Tea Party candidate in the race for the Texas Governorship. Between Palin's already having disappointed some Tea Partiers in KY, the above, and her stumping for John McCain, some Tea Party folks might start wondering just whose side she's on.

Comments

[Sherri]

Fact: Tea Party is not a political party.
Fact: Not all Tea Party activists should be in political office.
Fact: True Tea Party peeps know the previous two facts.

[Gary Ogletree]

I'm sure about Sarah Palin. It's Dan R. I'm having doubts about. Paul Begala, anyone?

[Dan Riehl]

"Fact: Not all Tea Party activists should be in political office."

Oh, I see. So, instead of the state's TP activists deciding that, Sarah Palin should do it for them. Okay, I get it now.

And, no, Gary - the Begala reference makes you look foolish. I'm not disrespecting the TX TP crowd - that would be Palin with her Perry endorsement, apparently.

[David R. Graham]

Dan Riehl needs no defending and neither does Sarah Palin. Let's let it roll, see what develops. Everyone is entitled and even obligated to put in whatever they think is true and best and whatever they say and do deserves attention, rumination and evaluation. Soon enough the facet of the diamond from which all other facets are visible will heave into view. That's the one we want. When we see it, we'll know we see it and how to proceed. Meanwhile, let's abide discovery, I pray.

[Kentucky Colonel]

So, if I understand you Riehl, Palin should always support the Tea Party candidate over any other candidate, regardless of the qualifications of the TP candidate or his/her ability to win. Is that right? I just want to make sure I understand how you think Palin should act.

And I see you're still hung up on that $100K. You're beginning to sound like Charles Johnson and Andrew Sullivan. Something gets stuck in your crawl and you can't seem to dislodge it.

[callingallcomets]

There do seem to be a lot of people claiming to be speaking for the "real" tea partiers - odd really when these same people then go on at length about it being a loose alliance of activists with little or no formal structure...so, if that is the case, how on earth are we expected to know who the "real" TPers are? Perhaps we ought to wait until CPAC then they will all turn up en masse because, of course, unlike the TPC, CPAC will be free...or am I mistaken?

[Kentucky Colonel]

The Tea Party group I belong to in KY favors Rand Paul. The Tea Party group that Lisa Graas belongs to in KY, favors Bill Johnson. Lisa has taken great offense that Palin endorsed Paul. This is a good example of someone being described as a TP candidate not being the candidate of all TP groups.

I have a friend in Dallas who belongs to two TP groups, neither of which supports Medina, but instead supports Perry's re-election. He and a group of his fellow TP patriots attended the Perry rally yesterday. Does that mean they are just pretending to be TPer's?

[Neo]

The real elephant in the room here is those folks who thought that the "Tea party" is an actual party and that Sarah Palin had joined (or taken it over).

This is still a "movement", not a party.

Just look at the bumpy landscape that this weekend created. We had (former) Rep. Tom Tancredo’s speech that went into (paraphase) "can't spell vote or say it". Also, a taste of the "Birther" thing and Andrew Breitbart with the "press sucks" stuff. None of this gives any "warm and fuzzy" feelings to many who want fiscal responsibility in DC, which I thought was the focus of "Tea Parties".

These "little issues" do nothing except to push people away, but at the same time I've seen a number of "thin skinned" folks who preach about inclusiveness one day and stomp off after one of these "little issues" come up.

[Jim B]

This is the great fallacy of calling Medina "THE Tea Party candidate" when she is no such thing because there IS no such thing. The Tea Party isn't a party at all.

She may have a great resume and great ideas and just been inspired to run by Tea Parties, or she may be cynically taking advantage of her own local Tea Party movement. I don't think any of us here have the facts on the ground that would allow us to make a judgment of whether she or Rick Perry best represents the aspirations of most Texas Tea Partiers.

What I'm seeing here is that because Palin has come out in support of a Republican - as opposed to an "actual Tea Partier" - that somehow she is betraying Tea Partiers. How is that the case? Has Perry not been one of Obama's most vocal opponents from the outset? Has he not been in charge of a state which is both low-tax and high on individual freedom? Is Texas not friendly to small business entrepreneurship under his leadership?

As Palin herself said - and as Dan, up until he started on this recent "Palin is doing everything wrong" schtick, also advised - the Tea Partiers should be free to make up their own minds and not reflexively follow the crowd. What I'm seeing here is that Dan implies that if Palin doesn't reflexively endorse Medina because she bears some sort of "Tea Partier" label (which some here have already disputed her entitlement to), then she's some sort of sellout or not really in tune with Tea Partiers.

It's obviously not possible that Palin could have looked at the potential candidates and made an independent decision that Perry was the one who was the one most in tune with her own policy goals - or the one most likely to be able to actually achieve them. There has to be some sort of double-secret Tea Party betrayal here?

C'mon, Dan...you're starting to sound like a one-trick pony here.

P.S. Before I am dismissed as some sort of blind Palin supporter, that's not the case. I'm not even sure that she would make the best possible candidate in 2012. I *AM* very inclined for Mitch Daniels as VP no matter who heads the ticket as I don't think he has the personal charisma to head a national ticket, but his governing bona fides in a potential swing state are impeccable.

[Huey]

Apparently, Palin isn't qualified to be a tea party "leader," just a follower.

How about Palin doing what she said she would do and support the person she believes is the best choice for office and others do the same, and, after a contested primary, the voters choose?

I mean, it's an idea whose time just may have come...

[Huey]

Kentucky Colonel: You mean that individual tea party members have actual, independent thought!?!?

Oh. My. Gosh.

I thought the "tea party movement" spoke with a single voice! Leaderless, of course, but with a single voice. That only the selected pundits can hear. And tell us what it is.

[Al in St. Lou]

Maybe I just didn't read carefully enough, but how is Palin's support of Perry "disrespecting the Texas Tea Party"?

Here's a better take on the Nashville convention: http://www.americanthinker.com/2010/02/did_you_feel_the_earth_move.html

Dan, you claim you're calling Palin out for her mistakes, but you haven't been convincing me that she's making mistakes.

[ktgreat]

Is it possible that when lined up against Medina, Perry is simply the better choice? Why does she have to tow some ALL TEA PARTY line? This notion that because someone hops on the Tea Party Train they are automatically better than the Republican is a little weird.

[SacTownMan]

Damn Dan, if you want to get some heated comments just post something about Palin, Glen Beck or that Gerbil loving freak Drew.

I can see your points about the true intentions of Beck and Palin. I must admit to being much less sceptical than you given their combined effect on the laudable goal of bringing down the troll empire!!

As far as the Gerbil abuser you can't post enough negative things about that freak of nature!!

It's fun to read the comments by "one N" and all of the other half-wits at the Atlantic rag when they show up to defend his sick ass!

[unseen]

Dan the one trick pny it seems

[rah]

Palin has no obligation to support any candidate other than those she chooses. She has been friends with Perry for a while and knows him. He has a record. This Medina candidate may not have record. I know nothing. I am willing to consider an unknown when there is not a good candidate. In this case the good candidate is Perry.

Palin may support the ideas and complaints of the Tea Party people but she does not have to support any candidate that is labeled a TP candidate. As others have said the TP is not a political party and not on the ballot.

Palin made the TP convention big news by her prescence that is enough and she has endorsed their ideas. She is not beholden any further.

[Steve Poling]

If Mrs. Palin was telling the truth that there's no King or Queen of the Tea Party, then I don't suppose there's anyone telling her she can't support Rick Perry.

Moreover, I doubt anyone has ever built the pidgeon-hole within which to file Mrs. Palin. It's frustrating and it makes me look stupid when I try.

[Tom Lamb]

The issue you touched on is just the start for Palin... Arizona is when things start to really go south.

The part that struck me about Palin's speech at the TPN was her attack on "Big Oil"... That hopey - changey thing she spoke about also applies to Alaska.

After her endorsement of McCain and stumping for him in March, Palin had better step into the conservative confessional and ask forgivness for her sins.

She will not survive a primary fight..

Because her resume of taxing "Big Oil" and denying due process to Exxon has the same feel, rhetoric and outcome (Venezuela courts overturned Hugo's same play as Palin's on yanking Exxon oil leases) as Hugo Chavez..

And I am sure the hyperbole will continue from those who support the actions that Palin took. Usually it comes from the Democrats who she met while crossing the aisle on policies that taxed "Big Oil" but there are those who you can call, Palinistas, since it has that Latin American ring to it.

[Kentucky Colonel]

Mr. Lamb where are you getting your info? From what I've read, the action against the Exxon leases started before Palin took office.

http://www.adn.com/money/industries/oil/story/1089952.html

[Kathy from Kansas]

The Texas race is Perry vs. Hutchinson. All my relatives are in Texas, and I've never even heard of Medina or White. Sarah's interested in people who can WIN--and Perry is a more conservative candidate than Hutchinson.

As for McCain. I suspect it's because Sarah has a great deal of personal loyalty towards him, and also because she has a lot of genuine respect for him. As do I, given the vigor of his fights for sane policy on the floor of the Senate this past year. He has spoken out repeatedly, boldly and articulately against Obamacare, budget deficits and all the sleazy backdoor deals. Did you see his smackdown of Al Franken last year? I was ready to stand up and cheer! Yes, I wish we'd seen more of that fighting spirit back in 2008. But he's been a valuable player in the Senate this past year. Also, everybody likes to criticize McCain for being in the "Gang of 14" a few years back---but had it not been for that gang, we would not now have two WONDERFUL conservative justices in the Supreme Court, John Roberts and Sam Alito.

The Rand Paul thing? Well, you're never going to please all the people all the time, and Sarah can support whoever she damn well pleases. It's her PAC.

[Gary Ogletree]

Dan, review your bizarre little jabs at Palin these last weeks. Paul Begala, you betcha.

[alwaysfiredup]

Palin believes in doing the right thing. As such, I expect she will think carefully on what to do with the proceeds from her NTPC speech and use those particular funds (or at least the same amount, as funds are fungible) for an appropriate tea-party purpose. We shall see when the disclosures are due.

[Mary Jane Page]

Anyone who doesn't know Debra Medina didn't watch either debate. She only mopped up both candidates with her knowledge of the constitution, her honesty, and ability to hold her own against big government candidates. It is a David and Goliath fight for Debra, but I am voting for David. Watch it on youtube if you don't believe.

[Rick Parker]

Sarah is interested in people who can win? That is funny. I guess that's why she decided to go with McCain. I wonder how she feels about Obama? He did a great job of winning.

Don't be an idiot. We need to support those persons who will do the most to safeguard our life, liberty, and property.

KBH won't protect your life until you are on your way down the birth canal. Did you see her refuse to answer the Roe v Wade question. I'll bet each of you could give a yes/no answer to the question of repealing Roe v Wade? If you believe in right to life, KBH is out.

Rick perry will not protect your property rights if they get in the way of whatever he wants to do. Ask the people who owned land in the way of the TransTexasCorridor. Oh no, the people don't like the TransTexas Corridor so let's get rid of it. What does Perry do? He decides to just change the name instead.

Rick Perry will not protect your liberty. When his pals in the drug company needed more money, he decided to vaccinate your daughters by fiat.

Medina is the only candidate who answers every question honestly and straightforwardly.

This is the first time in our lives we will have a chance to throw the bums out and actually replace them with someone who is not a bum.

[Huey]

So, the thing to do is what Palin said you should do...FIGHT for your candidate in the primary.

If your candidate can garner the most votes, then great! Vote for him/her in the general election!

If your candidate can't garner the most votes, then, move on and vote for the person who MOST aligns with your values in the general because SOMEONE is going to be elected, and, if you don't vote for the person who, in the general election, who MOST aligns with your values, you're likely to get someone who is antithetical to your values. (See, e.g., "conservatives" who voted 3rd party or didn't vote because they didn't want McCain and ended up with saddling the country with Obama. Good job there, y'all!)

But, fight on the ISSUES in the primaries, not the personalities. Stop cutting primary opponents off at the knees with personal attacks and calling them "liberal" when, at worst, they just ain't AS "conservative" as one would like.