John Ziegler can take his phony, self-serving concern and shove it
**Posted by Phineas
The Internet brouhaha of the day is for once not about Anthony Weiner’s peccadilloes. (For the latest on that…) Instead, we get a long article at The Daily Caller from John Ziegler announcing that Sarah Palin cannot win, decrying the “bunker mentality” that’s supposedly set in at the Palin camp and declaring that her candidacy, should she run, would be a disaster for the Republican party.
This, mind you, came from someone who counts himself as a friend and supporter.
I was planning to write a rebuttal dealing with the lack of any evidence for Ziegler’s assertions and his evident overwhelming self-regard, but William Jacobson of Legal Insurrection beat me to it, so I’ll refer you to his post. I do want to quote one portion, though:
Ziegler is a complete narcissist. His article is all about him, his feelings, and his imagined facts. There is little substance, in fact almost no substance, to many of the negative conclusions he reaches. Here is a good example, in one of the sure-to-be quoted passages from the article:
- There’s also the fact that Sarah’s entire operation is increasingly managed like a CIA field office; that she’s adopted a bunker mentality; that she’s trusting the wrong people, some of whom I know are simply exploiting her.
Yet what actual evidence does Ziegler cite; what quotes from people are included; what substance is there in the article other than the fact that Ziegler himself is offended that his opinions that Palin should not run may not be resonating with Palin (in fact, that’s not even clear).
Be sure to read the whole thing.
As I said in a comment there, I couldn’t escape the impression while reading Ziegler’s article this morning that I was reading something by a “creepy fan” or “spurned courtier,” the kind of person who knows the best interests of the object of his fascination better than that person does, herself. Unable to influence her to do what he thinks is best for her, he becomes a large-scale version of a “concern troll,” the commenter who shows up on blogs pretending sympathy, yet all the while spreading doubts and defeatism.
I may be wrong, but that’s the strong impression I get from Ziegler.
Then there is his declaration that she cannot win and therefore should not run; my only reply is that he may be right about winning, but it is her right to run and the voters’ right to decide — not John Ziegler’s, nor any other pundit or would-be pundit in the MSM or the blogosphere. I’m getting darned sick and tired of self-proclaimed gatekeepers who keep trying to pick my candidates for me.
Let’s turn this away from Palin for a moment and consider another example: I don’t like Mike Huckabee. I don’t think he would be a good president and I would not vote for him, unless I had no other realistic choice than Obama. But I would never say to him, “Governor, don’t you dare run. You can’t win, I just know it, and I’d hate to see you go through all that.” On the contrary, were Huckabee to change his mind and get in the race, I’d say “Fine. Welcome in, and let the competition begin,” because we the voters benefit from a broad choice much more than we do from a few “anointed ones.”
So, even if I weren’t already a Palin supporter, I’d want her in the race because I believe she has something of substance to offer the electorate, and I as a voter want that broad range of choices. (1)
No matter what the John Zieglers of the world say.
LINKS: More from Hot Air. Patterico at the end of a post presents evidence that backs up my spurned courtier observation.
Footnotes:
(1) Really, all you in the MSM and other media elites: We’re not children, and we’re quite capable of choosing our candidates on our own, thank you.
(Crossposted at Sister Toldjah)