Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

Palin’s support for Orrin Hatch is not new

Palin’s support for Orrin Hatch is not new

The big news last night was that Sarah Palin endorsed Orrin Hatch (video via HotAir):

Many people are acting surprised.  But Palin’s support is not new, as this video from August 2011 indicates, although calling it a formal “endorsement’ may be new:

I set forth my position on April 23:

I’m not jumping on the anti-Orrin Hatch bandwagon, and not making his primary race part of Operation Counterweight.


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.



Hatch is NOT Lugar…not by a long throw.

BUT he is a Beltway Dinosaur, and needs to be replaced.

Again, a perfect argument for term limits.

Utah should support Dan Liljenquist.

And I still love Palin.

She’s a practical person and picks her fights. Hatch is unlikely to lose this. Why piss off the establishment with nothing to show for it?

But Hatch is a relic of collusive RINOism and should go. Liljenquist deserves her support. Because she is viewed as a Tea Party tribune, Palin will pay a price for this.

    Juba Doobai! in reply to raven. | May 23, 2012 at 11:29 am

    She doesn’t care about pissing off the RINO’s. This is about showing the newbies the ropes and tricks so they don’t get rolled by the Communists the way the RINO’s are. I have good memories of Hatch fighting for the right kind of judges.

      raven in reply to Juba Doobai!. | May 23, 2012 at 11:49 am

      I don’t think she cares either, but in practical terms what does she gain by doing so without some result which redounds to her credit and strength? It’s just a waste of capital.

      She’s a smart and practical politician. She has more principle in her finger than most do in their entire bodies, but she’s still a politician.

      I’m not sure I agree with your “mentor” theory. Hatch has been rolled too many times in his own career to impress me as a wizened jedi master prepared or even interested in tutoring newbies.

        Juba Doobai! in reply to raven. | May 23, 2012 at 9:49 pm

        Perhaps it’s not about what she stands to gain but about what she thinks is right to do.

        Yes, Hatch has been rolled a few times well. That’s where the young’uns come in.

        Palin does what she does for her own reasons, primary amongst which is doing what’s right according to her principles. She finds some thread that she can pull on and she pulls it. The thread was there in Hatch, not in Lugar.

        kobayashi in reply to raven. | May 26, 2012 at 8:04 am

        Raven [and Juba] Mark Levin spent some serious time on the why’s of supporting Hatch, that go from today back to the time when all our current ‘strict constructionist’ Supreme Court Justices were not on the court.

        Yes, I have a humorous vintage 2008 Ramirez cartoon picturing Congress and ‘put all of them on unemployment’.

        It was good to get Lugar out, I don’t think that equates to getting Hatch out.

    gary gulrud in reply to raven. | May 23, 2012 at 11:51 am

    “Palin will pay a price for this”

    Any TEA that would vote for Romney when the opponent is cratering helplessly is no TEA.

    Most of the support Palin might lose isn’t worth spit anyhow.

      Ragspierre in reply to gary gulrud. | May 23, 2012 at 12:26 pm

      Hep me out here, gary.

      I sometimes find you cryptic.

      Here, I don’t mind telling you I don’t understand this post at all.

        gary gulrud in reply to Ragspierre. | May 23, 2012 at 5:52 pm

        Cryptic? Moi?

        Palin, like her or loathe her or no opinion, has nothing to prove. TEAs that jump at every move she makes plainly are not busy.

        UT TEAs likewise have not been sitting on their hands. Hard to argue with axing Bennet, one of McConnell’s go to shape-shifters.

        That leaves the rest of us ‘polemicists’. If one resides in the states mentioned, or has been wetting their panties in ABO terror, has money or time and not given then what do you mean second-guessing Palin or UT?

This doesn’t rise to the same level of betrayal of Palin’s professed constitutional conservative principles that her endorsement of John McCain did, but it is disappointing. Hatch has been (by in large)a reliable conservative vote in the Senate but certainly he won’t go to the mat the way a DeMint or Rand Paul would.

Hatch still doesn’t grok the fight we are in. He puts Senate “comity” above the needs of his country and for that reason he should step aside and let a younger, fiercer conservative take up the decades long work of undoing the “great society”. He isn’t up to the task of reforming America’s national government and associated entitlement programs into something sustainable and enabling mechanisms that expand a citizen’s horizons instead of diminishing them.

    Juba Doobai! in reply to RDA. | May 23, 2012 at 11:21 am

    She paid her debts with her endorsement. Why is that hard to understand?

      Spare me the condescension. I applaud Sarah’s sense of honor, but Palin owed McCain nothing. It was McCain’s slimy handlers and consultants that damaged her to the point that a 2012 run was out of the question. Now we have to choke back the crap sandwich called Romney or endure four more years of Obama.

      The problem with supporting moderate RINOs or even DIABLOs like Collins, Snowe and Brown are that they define just how conservative a policy position conservatives can get. How hard did Hatch fight for Palin anyway? Can’t recall any full throated pushback against the Republican establishment when it came to Palin from Hatch.

      A sense of loyalty explains McCain. But supporting Hatch? I guess it’s securing some IOUs for a future run. The perfect is the enemy of the good and all that. But too many endorsements like this will destroy the Palin brand.

        gary gulrud in reply to RDA. | May 23, 2012 at 6:05 pm

        Spare us the effete derision. The Fiorina endorsement over Devore(now a Texan) who opened at 39% was a bigger puzzle until one gave the slightest thought to the general.

        Very late the RNC wasted big money after Boxer walked away in the polls.

        How much have DeMint and the TEAs accomplished in the Senate? Squat, its not even obvious their block is on the same page.

        Think again before you blow off Hatches senority, poseur.

        Juba Doobai! in reply to RDA. | May 23, 2012 at 9:53 pm

        Condescension? Huh!

        So, on the one hand you laud Palin’s sense of honor. On the other hand, you disdain it. Sweet.

Juba Doobai! | May 23, 2012 at 11:23 am

Palin’s endorsement of Hatch is a good strategic move. Who would y’all rather have showing the newbies the ropes? Hatch or Grahamnesty? Besides, she’s gonna send Hatch enough Cnservatives to make him live up to his words.

gary gulrud | May 23, 2012 at 11:25 am

Hatch sure beats Cornyn, Coburn, Graham, Corker or Shelby, any day of the week. UT TEAs aren’t going to get heat from me over Hatch, its their call, just as Bennet was.

That said, TX, OK, SC, TN and AL do not get a pass. Get rid of the bums.

MaggotAtBroadAndWall | May 23, 2012 at 12:08 pm

Palin is making a mistake. Dan Liljenquist is a quality candidate. He is young. And he is strongly conservative. He could potentially be a strong, conservative voice in the Senate for 30-40 years.

What’s interesting to me is that after the “shellacking” in the 2010 mid-terms, Jason Chavez had threatened to primary Hatch. Then he mysteriously decided not to follow through. It seems fairly clear that Hatch, the power brokers in Utah, and the “establishment” all decided that if Chavez would not primary Hatch, then they will support Chavez in a Senate bid when Hatch retires after one more term.

Screw that. I hope Utahans decide for themselves to reject this pre-arranged deal. Utah should show “the establishment” they are in charge and make Liljenquist one of their U.S. Senators.

Cowboy Curtis | May 23, 2012 at 12:37 pm

Hatch is a calcified incumbent who has been in the senate my entire life. Republicans will carry the senate sear regardless of who wins. If Hatch’s challenger is more conservative than he, or even just equally conservative, then that’s who needs to win the primary.

Hatch isn’t some wise old statesman. He’s just another grand pooh bah of Incumbentastan. When we have a chance for an even trade, more so when we can trade up, these old bulls need to be put out to pasture. My thoughts on this are a bid like Lord Nelson’s- it doesn’t hurt to hang a captain every now and again. It keeps the rest in line.

I disagree with Palin. Orrin Hatch has served the people of Utah well. It isn’t a lifetime job, but some new blood needs to be infused into the Senate.

I’m looking forward to these Senate races. With Mourdock winning Indiana, hopefully Liljenquist winning Utah, and Democrat Clare McCaskill losing to Sarah Steelman in Missouri, we should have a very fresh look to the Senate.

The work of bending the arc of RINOism is multifaceted.

If I were Palin I might be tempted to tell all those people anguishing over this endorsement to “grow a pair of your own and stop whining about my choices.”

Just like the rest of us she made a choice and unlike the rest of us even explained/defended her choice. She really doesn’t owe us anything more than that. If you find her rationale inadequate – ignore her endorsement and support who you like.

IMO this constant whinong by people because they think Palin let them down because she didn’t support who they think she should have is getting old. If people put her on an ivory pedestal – shame on them.

    raven in reply to katiejane. | May 23, 2012 at 4:35 pm

    What are some examples of this “whining”? Is disagreement by definition “whining”? The premise of the disagreement is fundamental to the message and mission of the Tea Party. Forums like these are where people choose to disagree; the decision to ignore the endorsement or not is a separate process which develops over time.

    And the reduction of so many issues to “growing a pair” has become tiresome — or at least one of convenience. One could just as easily challenge those politicians who endorse entrenched incumbents to “grow a pair” and take a leap on behalf of a young, principled conservative with a promising future and who could use a boost.

    Her choices and her influence matter, which is why so many care and argue. That’s healthy. The disagreement — the debate — is the natural function of this, and of the stakes involved. It should be welcomed.

      katiejane in reply to raven. | May 24, 2012 at 10:27 am

      Disagree with her choices all you want – IMO she has never claimed to always be right. But whining is when a valid disagreement with her endorsement choice falls into implied despair and anguish over it and that’s happening across numerous blogs. Whining is when disagreement with Palin’s choice appears to call for her to be shunned or at least cut from the family reunion because she didn’t support who you thought she should.

      I believe some of her choices have been young newcomers but that doesn’t mean she is obliged to always pick the outsider. Ever consider that she may feel that choice may not be ready at this time?

BannedbytheGuardian | May 23, 2012 at 7:49 pm

Exactly Prof . This is not new & Hatch is on record as thanking Palin for averting the Chaffetz challenge. Chaffetz is a romney ally & a would-be Senate plant.

Hatch’s Seniority , Mormonism & Utah strength are a better foil for a Pres Romney in his wishy washy ways.

The rest of it is up to the primary voters in Utah & then the general Utah voters.

I can see the logic then & now.

    “Chaffetz is a romney ally”

    And so is Liljenquist.

    A LONGTIME romney ally.

    Liberal supreme court nominations from Romney?

    See Liljenquist lead the cheers!

    Remember how Hatch stood up for Clarence Thomas?

    Remember how Hatch voted against both of Obama’s nominees?

    If Supreme Court nominees are one’s big bugaboo, you don’t want either Romney or Liljenquist anywhere NEAR the process.

As someone said in the earlier (linked) thread:

In 1976 in his first run for public office, he was elected to the United States Senate, defeating Democrat Frank Moss, a three-term incumbent. Among other issues, Hatch criticized Moss’s 18-year tenure in the Senate, saying “What do you call a Senator who’s served in office for 18 years? You call him home.” Hatch argued that many Senators, including Moss, had lost touch with their constituents.

I suppose staying there six terms makes Hatch twice as good as Moss? {/sarc}