Stuart Schneiderman is a person of much insight and I commend his site "Had Enough Therapy"
AT THIS LINK. Here is an extract from his essay read the rest and his other posts at the link.
Until yesterday Sarah Palin had been unusually quiet.
The Romney campaign had marginalized her and Fox News had dismissed her as a commentator.
At its Republican National Convention Team Romney put Gov. Chris Christie on the podium in prime time. It did not even invite Sarah Palin to speak.
Christie was no guts and no glory. He bombed. Then, he returned to New Jersey to suck up to Barack Obama. Appetite control is not his strong suit.
Statistical research shows that Mitt Romney lost the election because Palin voters did not show up at the polls. Could it be that they, like their paladin, felt rejected by the party.
Republicans examined the election data and managed to conclude that they needed to sponsor immigration reform. You know, because, as serious presidential contender Jeb Bush says, immigrants are more fertile.
Now, where did anyone get the idea that Republicans are the stupid party?
In effect, the Republican Party has two people who are good communicators. It has two national figures who can find just the right concept to communicate a point of view on an issue.
The first, Gov. Chris Christie has been a washout as a national leader.
Which leaves us with Sarah Palin.
As you know, Palin has a gift. She can go high-concept with the best of them. You recall her remarks about "death panels" and her famous: How’s that hopey-changey stuff working out for you?
Fair enough, President Obama has a gift too. But his does not involve communicating anything of substance. Obama’s speeches hypnotize people so that they ignore his basic emptiness.
After years of carnage, President Obama has allowed himself to get dragged, kicking and screaming into the Syrian Civil War. Bill Clinton said he should do it, so rather than look like he's caving in to public opinion he would rather look like he is bowing to the will of Bill Clinton. It's called leading from behind.
The debate on Obama’s new policy has been appropriately serious.
Most Americans don’t understand why we are getting involved in Syria because most Americans cannot tell the good guys from the bad guys. Or better,they don't think that there are any good guys. Iranian proxies and Hezbollah are fighting against Sunni terrorists and al Qaeda operatives. Don't you want them both to lose?
One would be forgiven for thinking that American self-interest is well served by their mutually assured self-destruction.
The Obama administration has chosen to provide small arms to the rebels. Thinking people find it risible that the “Fast-and-Furious” crowd has not gotten over its yen to arm criminals.
An administration that did not understand the influence that al Qaeda exercised in Benghazi does not seem to understand that arming the rebels means arming al Qaeda.
Andrew Sullivan argued cogently against the new policy:
You can forgive a president once – even though his misguided, counter-productive and destabilizing war in Libya was almost as nuts as this latest foray. But by deciding to arm the Sunni radicals fighting the Shiites in Syria and Lebanon, the president has caved to the usual establishment subjects who still want to run or control the entire world. I don’t buy the small arms qualifier. You know that’s the foot in the door to dragging the United States into the middle of a civil war we do not understand and cannot control. If it has any effect, it will be to draw out the conflict still longer and kill more people. More staggeringly, he is planning to put arms into the hands of forces that are increasingly indistinguishable from hardcore Jihadists and al Qaeda – another brutal betrayal of this country’s interests, and his core campaign promise not to start dumb wars. Yep: he is intending to provide arms to elements close to al Qaeda. This isn’t just unwise; it’s close to insane.
And then, yesterday, at the Freedom and Faith Coalition Conference,Sarah Palin summed it all up in her typically effective high-concept way:
Militarily, where is our commander in chief? We're talking now more new interventions. I say until we know what we're doing, until we have a commander and chief who knows what he's doing, well, let these radical Islamic countries who aren't even respecting basic human rights, where both sides are slaughtering each other as they scream over an arbitrary red line, 'Allah Akbar,' I say until we have someone who knows what they're doing, I say let Allah sort it out.
Right or wrong, no one has said it better.
Like it or not, we do not have a commander in chief who knows what he’s doing. We do not have a foreign policy team that knows what it’s doing either.
Under the Obama foreign policy the Middle East has imploded. The region has become a rolling catastrophe… political chaos, war, terrorism, famine. You name it, the nations of that region have it."
Fair use notice: This website contains copyrighted material, the use of which may or may not have been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Excerpts of such material is made available for educational purposes, and as such this constitutes ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Act. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this website is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. Original material published on this website may be excerpted and the excerpt reproduced for the purpose of critical reviews. However, such original material may not be reproduced in full on another website or in any manner without prior approval from this website’s owner. In all cases when material from this website is reproduced in full or in part, the author and website must be credited by name and a hyperlink provided to this website.