But we have seen Mrs. Palin on the national stage for seven weeks now, and there is little sign that she has the tools, the equipment, the knowledge or the philosophical grounding one hopes for, and expects, in a holder of high office. She is a person of great ambition, but the question remains: What is the purpose of the ambition? She wants to rise, but what for?
...it's unclear whether she is Bushian or Reaganite. She doesn't think aloud. She just... says things.
...No news conferences? Interviews now only with friendly journalists? You can't be president or vice president and govern in that style, as a sequestered figure. This has been Mr. Bush's style the past few years, and see where it got us. You must address America in its entirety, not as a sliver or a series of slivers but as a full and whole entity, a great nation trying to hold together. When you don't, when you play only to your little piece, you contribute to its fracturing.
In the end the Palin candidacy is a symptom and expression of a new vulgarization in American politics. It's no good, not for conservatism and not for the country. And yes, it is a mark against John McCain, against his judgment and idealism [emphasis mine; Peggy Noonan, "Palin's Failin'," Wall Street Journal, 2008.10.17].
"...must address America in its entirety..." Hmm. Sounds a lot like something a great statesman said yesterday. A President must speak to America—all of America. Not just Joe Sixpack and Gooney McBuckshot.
When I can rely entirely on the statements of Republicans to justify my vote for Barack Obama and Joe Biden, the McCain campaign doesn't stand a chance.