I have read more about Sarah Palin than I really needed to. But it did serve one function: I think I have discovered the real reason for her popularity, which is also the reason that she doesn't have much of a political future in elected office.

Here it is: she is revered because she is really the only political figure with a bullhorn that makes the arguments for various political positions that the relatively uneducated among us make. That is, when she argues "drill, baby, drill", the uneducated voter says, "there's a pol who argues my exact reasoning! She is so smart!". That uneducated voter doesn't know that the amount of oil in the ground is limited; that the US can't drill to energy independence; and that the oil is a decade or more away. So in their eyes, Palin makes the argument as the uneducated voter would make the argument - without taking into account all known facts, in both cases because they have not bothered to educate themselves.

In a way, Palin and her voters are perfect modern Americans: anyone is an expert in anything, regardless of effort expended in learning. We don't need pointed headed Ivy Leaguers to tell us what to do. After all, look where listening to them got us. We have all the wisdom we need, and in Palin we finally have someone famous to stand up and shout our ideas (however wrong and misinformed they actually are).

So, Palin is popular because she makes the uneducated voters case; unedcuated voters need representation too. Just makes it hard to more educated voters to get anything done.

That describes how I discuss the lack of populist attention from the democrats. It would be truly amazing if Republicans swooped in with populist rhetoric and became the party of the working class.

When the health care debate started, Obama should have published 10 stories per day of documented screwings of individuals by insurance companies, with a summary paragraph of how the case would have been handled under, say, France's system. Just bludgeon and humiliate insurers into the most reviled group in the country.

Then, I would have tee'ed off against the banks. I would have had 10 case studies per day for a month about bank practices and again, bludgeoned and humiliated them in the second most reviled group in the country.

Next up, bankers. After that, the mortgate industry. Then the industrial food producers that taint products. Just over and over and over until the message could not be avoided. Fox, to attack the president would have had to defend the indefensible. Instead, its the other way around.

If Americans can't get their populism, they will turn from the public body and submerge themselves in the cult of the individual. The Democrats have missed a once a century opportunity to make the economy work for people, instead of the other way around. I feel ill just thinking about this.

Palin could easily be the populist voice to which conservatives and some number of moderates turn. She is uncompromised by any of the hated industries above. She doesn't know enough to make things too complex for simple folk seeking simple answers. Turning harder to Christ and the cult of the individual is her answer. She could lead a 50 year reversal of human rights in this country.

Why can't Democrats lead this country? The people are demanding companies, industries and individuals to be skewered. Why won't a Democrat lead? Glenn Beck is happy to lead. The fact that the Democrats have not coopted the tea baggers is absurd.

When members of congress think it is somehow related to their purpose in congress to stand up and spout sheer, utter, bizarre nonsense as his opintion and to not be laughed at until humiliated to the point of resignation, then congress simply is nonfunctional. Seriously, why is any member of congress saying anything that is not grounded in science or related fields?

If the members of congress are not sufficiently intelligent to partake in a debate where you use facts to reach a conclusion, what are they doing there? How can congress be reconceived so it deals ONLY with knowns? This is King's opinion - there is nothing in his statement that is provable. I can simply be dismissed. Yet he thought it was somehow related to the purpose of congress to say something a second rate commenter would say in response to a WND story?

How is this country going to survive if its congress and executives all act like GM's executive team? That is my greatest fear: that much as congress derides GM management, they are GM themselves! They can't see that staying the same is to fall behind.

This liberal wants to neither pay for the health care of illegals or benefit from the cheap labor they provide. As long as citizens can lay claim to part of my income, we must do everything possible to keep labor in short supply, which will drive up wages and drive people to the most valued services. If labor were free, McDonald's would have a greeter and people to put french fries in your mouth so you wouldn't have to strain your arm.

The public is called on to provide for the common defense, retirement, fire, police, etc; we really don't want to have jobs that don't pay enough for everyone to contribute something to the pot. Will we live in smaller houses? Yes. Will lettuce cost $0.10 per head more? Yes. But potentially some of these costs can be made up on savings in transfer payments. We should at least try this route seriously for a decade.