In a pithy analysis of the results of the CPAC straw poll of preferred Republican Presidential candidates in 2012, Steve Bainbridge has a funny line, calling Sarah Palin the "Paris Hilton of politics."
This got me wondering -- 5 or 10 years from now, looking back to this time, who will history conclude did more damage to the Republican Party, George W. Bush and his profligate spending that destroyed the party brand of fiscal restraint, or Sarah Palin and her anti-intellectual/anti-knowledge vacuity?
Comments