Sarah Palin shines in Hong Kong

Most of the reaction I've seen so far from Sarah Palin's speech at the CLSA Investors' Forum in Hong Kong appears to be quite positive.  At least one source remarked that she took not just one party to task but both major parties in the US, and she also gently chided China on the human rights front.

Surprising me, the NYTimes presented a fairly positive view of her speech.  I particularly liked this part:

A number of people who heard the speech in a packed hotel ballroom, which was closed to the media, said Mrs. Palin spoke from notes for 90 minutes and that she was articulate, well-prepared and even compelling.

Not really surprising me, CNN made the fact that a couple of people walked out the main point of its headline:  "Some early exits as Palin woos Hong Kong investors".

Those who attended her speech said she did well, though some could be seen leaving early on. A few of those people said they were heading to other forum offerings. Most people declined to speak with the media about the speech.

CNN didn't really have much to say about the content of the speech, choosing instead to use quotes from others, starting, of course, with someone who didn't care for her.  Typical.  (And, I could go on about the people who comment at CNN's articles, and I will, but not here.)

Dan Riehl links to the NYTimes (link above) and to AFP (linked by Breitbart), which, according to at least one of his readers, had the worst write-up of the speech.  Was it?  As they used to say during Monday Night Football, you make the call:

Although she touched on the threat posed to the United States by terrorism and talked about links with traditional US allies in Asia such as Japan, Australia and South Korea, one Asian delegate complained she devoted too much time to her home state of Alaska.

"It was almost more of a speech promoting investment in Alaska," he said, declining to be named.

"As fund managers we want to hear about the United States as a whole, not just about Alaska. And she criticised Obama a lot but offered no solutions."

Granted, they did offer some positive coverage:

"She was brilliant," said a European delegate, on condition of anonymity.

(Why would you need anonymity for a quote like that?)

But what really told me what I needed to know about AFP's coverage was that the author of this piece seemingly expected Sarah Palin to screw the speech up somehow:

There were no apparent gaffes though from Palin, who was mocked during last year's presidential campaign for her lack of experience in foreign affairs and for her verbal blunders.

Now, if we were to see sentences like that after President Obama (who was mocked during last year's presidential campaign for verbal blunders such as "57 states") or Joe Biden (oh, you know!) spoke, I wouldn't be so convinced that this report was severely slanted.  But, as you may have noticed, we don't.

(But Snowed, isn't your blog slanted?  Yes.  I like Sarah Palin.  Duh!  But at least I'll admit it.  The MSM likes President Obama as much or more than I like Gov. Palin, but with the exception of Chris "Snugglebuggle Kissyface" Matthews, no one will bother to admit the truth about this situation, not that we haven't already figured it out...)

For more on Governor Palin's speech, Josh Painter has a great write-up, including tweets from people who were at the speech and links to several other reports.  Check it out.

Don Surber also has a good take on it:

Methinks some people expected Joan of Arc while others expected Tina Fey. I think they got Sarah, a bright person from middle America who is more mainstream than the geniuses we have in Washington.

So what is the takeaway from this speech?  Is Sarah Palin prepping for a 2012 presidential run?  Who knows.  And, in my opinion, it's too soon to care anyway.  My takeaway is that Sarah Palin is going to be someone who makes things happen, whether she is in office or not.  And I think that is a good thing.