Why Palin is Leaving - Think Huckabee

In the age of Obama, image is everything. It's how he got elected. It's how he governs.

Mike Huckabee gets that.

He is building a weekly audience by letting people in to see his agenda in a way that doesn't carry the contrivances of a campaign stop on the back of a caboose. He gets to set the tone. He gets to ask the questions. He gets to showcase his bass playing abilities on a weekly basis (Bill Clinton made just one cameo on Arsenio). He gets to portray himself the way he wants himself to be portrayed. He's on offense with his own show and that show is a significant arrow in his 2012 presidential campaign quiver.

The former Arkansas governor is not doing a weekly show because he wants to be a celebrity. He's doing it because he wants to be a frontrunner.

It's a new age and to reach voters, you have to be in their face while being on your terms. Huckabee seems to have figured that out. He was the Republican runner-up for president in 2008 so why hasn't the liberal media been attacking him instead of Sarah Palin?

Yes, it's true that she has a greater knack for galvanizing the base but one thing she doesn't have that Huckabee now does is the ability to fight back with an offensive weapon - her own show on the #1 cable news channel. She's stuck on a non-contiguous one-state stage while being forced into a national arena with a carnivorous leftwing media.

If ever there was a presidency that came about and whose engine continues to move forward with television imagery as its best friend, the Barack Obama presidency is it. He's on television every day and has learned how to leverage that imagery (despite the teleprompter) to his advantage.

Assuming Palin is neither wilting under the pressure of unceasing attacks nor pre-emptively attempting to stave off the revelation of some scandal, wouldn't it make sense for her to take the Huckabee route?

Every time Katie Couric, Matt Lauer, or Charlie Gibson, etc. want to talk to her, odds are good it'll be a forum in which she will have to defend herself from comments made by the likes of David Letterman. The invitation comes with ulterior motives like ratings. Being on the defensive is no way to increase your appeal. Putting others on defense is definitely more preferable (anyone think Couric would agree to show up on the Sarah Palin show as a guest?).

Sarah Palin has proven herself as a governor. It doesn't matter what state it is. She's also proven herself as someone who can galvanize the conservative base while standing up to the national pressure of a vice presidential debate. Maybe it's time for her to set the terms of the debates she's being dragged into against her will.

If Palin hasn't tired of the exposure and is conversely motivated and fueled by the attacks, maybe it's time for her to showcase her abilities. She was a newscaster and a journalism major. She understands the power of the television medium. She's done well with it. She's attractive and strong. When in front of the camera, she knows how to play the base like Mike Huckabee knows how to play the bass.

The age of Obama has shown that visual imagery is extremely powerful and being on offense while using it is far more desirable than constantly having to defend your honor with it.

White House Stonewalling on Walpin Investigation

When the president oversteps his bounds and fires an Inspector General without following the law he co-signed, damage control is sure to follow.

It did.

The firing of Gerald Walpin, by law, necessitated specific reasons be issued in writing and sent to congress. After telling Walpin via phone on June 10th that he had an hour to quit or be fired, White House counsel Norman Eisen found himself in front of investigators on Senator Chuck Grassley's staff defending the assertion that Walpin was "confused" and "disoriented" at a Board Meeting on May 20th.

Not satisfied with Eisen's answers, Grassley submitted questions to the White House in writing that sought answers by Wednesday, June 24th. Those answers weren't given and it now appears the White House has whipped out the "Executive Privilege" defense.

Byron York is once again all over it.

There are basically two possible short term outcomes.
1.) Republican Investigators, led by Grassley will dig in their heels and see how far they can push it

2.) It will be dropped, a fate far too many injustices inside the beltway seem to share.

Honduras: Bloomberg Calls Referendum a Poll?

The reason for the ouster of Honduras president Manuel Zelaya last Sunday was because he was trying to ensure his re-election via referendum despite the fact his country's constitution prohibits it. The only legal way for him to get his wish is through the amendment process.

While otherwise reporting objectively on the story, Bloomberg's word choices are distubring. Instead of calling attention to the primary reason for Zelaya's ouster, Bloomberg has decided to identify the referendum as a "poll" and a "survey".

Instance #1:
Honduras’s institutions remain united in support of Zelaya’s overthrow. The Supreme Court ruled that Zelaya violated the constitution by trying to hold an illegal poll on whether people support his proposal to change the constitution. The court issued an arrest order for the president on June 26.

Instance #2:
Zelaya also ignored a court order that said he couldn’t fire the head of the military for refusing to oversee the survey, and stormed a military base with a mob of civilians to “liberate” the ballots.

Yet, when referring to how Zelaya ally Hugo Chavez did the same thing to ensure that he would retain power in Venezuela, Bloomberg DID use the term.

The Venezuelan president won a referendum to amend the constitution in February that will allow him to run for re-election indefinitely.

Just to illustrate that I'm not splitting hairs here, check out Merriam Webster's definition of referendum.

1 a: the principle or practice of submitting to popular vote a measure passed on or proposed by a legislative body or by popular initiative b: a vote on a measure so submitted

The terms "poll" and "survey" seem to insinuate that what Zelaya was doing was innocuous and without consequence other than to test sentiment. A referendum carries the tone of something that prompts some sort of action. In this case, the action would have been discarding the constitution.

As the United States, the United Nations, the Organization of American States (OAS), and the Mainstream Media has decided to align with Zelaya, word games such as this only serve to further alienate those in Honduras who are defending their country's constitution.

Any and all arguments coming from those in support of Hugo Chavez ally Zelaya have totally avoided the reason for his ouster, a sure sign they have no real defense for it. The spinmeister arguments simply say he was democratically elected and was the victim of an illegal coup.