Writing on a Rasmussen poll which ranks Palin as being the top choice among Republicans on the issue of national security…
In a perfect world national security conservatives would probably choose Cheney as the 2012 nominee, but he wasn’t on the Rasmussen list, and folks shouldn’t be terribly surprised that Palin comes out on top in this breakdown.
“What planet is this fellow and his WS institution writing from?” might well be your response. The lady’s education of the world and its history, even of American history, is more paltry than many high school students each of us might know. Worse, her curiosity about such is obviously close to zero (which is precisely why she isn’t educated on these matters).
So, the obvious question presents itself…why does Goldfarb and the Weekly Standard support and promote this individual for VP and even for future president? Andrew Sullivan suggests:
What Goldfarb means, I suspect, is that the neocons could use her, as they used Bush, for more wars, invasions and occupations – for liberty!
It’s a thesis with a good deal of explanatory power. And to make it even more useful, one day somebody is going to do a bit of serious investigation of the ties linking the Weekly Standard/Commentary crowd and the military/industrial complex with its enormous financial stake in continued and expanded militarism.