Let the Mindless Palin Speculation Begin!

So Sarah Palin made some headlines this week, abdicating the throne of Alaska to pursue...something other than running Alaska.

While it's all well and good that she's making actual headlines, rather than wedging herself awkwardly into the conversation by talking about how creepy that Dave Letterman guy is (slaps forehead), what she has now started is an endless carousel of annoying speculation.

The news ran between segments about Michael Jackson and that Jonas Brother who got engaged, if that tells you anything about the magnitude of the speculating.

There are a few schools of thought on the subject. One is that she's bailing due to up-and-coming lawsuits that would derail her political viability, another is that she'll use all that time she was wasting trying to run Alaska and devote it to a tour of the lower 48 on her way to the White House, and another thinks that she'll ride the gravy train with biscuit-capped wheels all the way to the bank, getting out of elected office and speaking for money.

The three are not incompatible, which leads to a wide array of various combinations (seven!), and fuels speculation further.

I yield to the imitable Mark McKinnon, who prepped her for her admittedly low-bar and successful Vice-Presidential debate with Joe "HEY!" Biden. He says that she exceeded his expectations in the debate, always knows how to keep things interesting, and he concludes that she has still more up her sleeve.

But what do we actually know about Palin, and could that shed light on her future intentions? I don't think we know enough about her, honestly. There's not enough on the record, politically, to gauge her actions in that arena.

That plays to her advantage. While I think it'd be akin to comparing apples to oranges F-16 Tomcat jet planes, she, like President Obama, has enough of what I'd call a "blind appeal" that makes her, to many people, simply wonderful, despite lacking hitherto considered invaluable intangibles, in their cases, experience.

In other words, those who cultishly cling to Palin, as Obama, don't cling because of their brief political stints as governor and senator respectively; They've got something else altogether. Call it snazz, I guess. Now, from there, you can go off on a number of different tangents and directions spouting the obvious differences between Obama and Palin. I'm not comparing them any further or to any other extent.

She's very folksy, which appeals to some and doesn't to others. She's relatively inexperienced, which matters to some and doesn't to others. But across the board, the consensus is that she keeps things interesting and is therefore someone to keep an eye on.

Whatever breaks up this Michael Jackson mania is a-okay with me, anyway.

The Far Side

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

Interesting stuff from Mark McKinnon, a Dubya and McCain adviser and Republican strategist, on the Rachel Maddow show.

As the video is about ten minutes long, a hefty chunk of which is Maddow waxing about how stupid and racist Republicans are for calling Justice-to-be Sotomayor stupid and racist, but McKinnon's points can be summarized as thus: The far right is strangling the rest of the GOP, and could force the party into permanent minority status.

“The Republican party right now is clawing its way to the bottom. They’ve got 23 percent of the American electorate supporting them. They’re seen as a sort of bitter, partisan party right now: anti-immigrant, anti-Hispanic. I just think that this sends a lot of the wrong signals to independents and soft Republican voters out there who are leaving the party in droves. … I say it as a proud Republican, and as a progressive and moderate Republican, but I would just hope that there’s room for us still. There are a lot of voices in the party that seem to be crowding and shouting us out and shouting us down all the time.”

Evan Smith, Editor in Chief of McKinnon's homeland's Texas Monthly, blogged that this is 'McKinnon vs. the GOP' in his titular address of the Maddow appearance. One commenter zinged the Bush strategist as someone who is turning his back on those he praised during the '00 and '04 elections — the far right base — and concluded with "Good luck getting your crazy uncles to leave the party you insisted they attend."

I'm a little torn on it. Have I noticed that the far right seems to be steering the party in an awkward and thus far ineffective manner? Youbetcha, but that could be because it's a vocal minority, which tends to be the loudest. And while the far right did at the very least help win the first two 21st century presidential elections, could it not be said that may have lost the third in 2008?

I think Smith may have this wrong, pitting McKinnon against the GOP. I think McKinnon wants the GOP to thrive and prosper as best it can, with its current track being, uh, not that. Not to say that the far right is unappreciated or crazy or needs to shut their big mouths or anything like that. But like I've said before, the base is the base for a reason. While the base will gripe and complain, I don't think it would gripe and complain to voting for a Democrat.

And vice versa. In 2000, which McKinnon alludes to, Democrats were struggling to find their way. The base was pulling the party too far left, and the word 'liberal' was a dirty word that Gore was desperate to expunge from his record. They've certainly found their way these days, in both state and federal legislatures.

But that is certainly not permanent. The saber-rattling of those in majority power to pull their agendas further right in 2000 or left 2008 often falls on deaf ears. The nation is centrist almost by an exact law of averages; one either votes Democrat or Republican, for the most part.

McKinnon seems to be trying to help the GOP by suggesting it allow the more moderate and "soft" wing of the Republican party in its tent. The GOP used to be known as the big tent party. I think McKinnon is pushing it further that way than it is now.

In order for victory, I think it has to be that way, or like McKinnon said, become a "permanent minority." The ardent principles of the far right will resurface as a vibrant ideal, rest assured, but that's not what's going to win elections now. Feasible alternatives, credibility and inclusivity — without betraying those principles — will be the way to go.

Now, anybody who has those 'feasible alternatives' figured out, tell me, and no one else. Meet me at a bank of my choice.