Since Oprah wouldn't invite Palin on her show during the election why shouldn't Palin launch her own show instead?

Like many people, I was both shocked and saddened about Sarah Palin's sudden decision to resign as Governor of Alaska at the end of this month. 

I was disappointed in her decision mainly because if she had remained Governor and had decided to make a bid for the GOP nomination she could have made the case she had more executive experience in government than Mitt Romney.  Alas she can no longer make such an argument.

However, John Kerry will not get his wish.  Sarah Palin isn't going missing. 

Even if diehard leftists and condescending conservatives cannot see it, Sarah Palin has something to offer America whether or not she holds elected office.

Last month, more than half a year removed from the 2008 election, Palin drew an estimated crowd of 20,000 people when she visited Auburn, New York to commemorate William Seward. It was Seward, who as Secretary of State under President Andrew Johnson oversaw the purchase of Alaska from Russia in 1867.  But those 20,000 came to see Sarah not to hear about Seward. If that many people came to see Palin in a small town in upstate New York, then imagine how many people in small towns throughout America would watch Palin on TV every weekday morning or afternoon. 

Cokie Roberts might have been onto something when she suggested shortly after the election that Palin could be "the white Oprah." The longtime reporter and commentator for ABC told the Boston Chamber of Commerce last November, "There's more of Sarah Palin in our future."

Since Oprah wouldn't invite Palin on her show during the election (due to her support for Barack Obama) why shouldn't Palin launch her own show instead?  While Oprah Winfrey attracts an estimated 7.5 million viewers a day, nearly 40 million viewers tuned in to watch Palin's speech at the Republican National Convention last September.

While it might not be fair to compare the ratings of a one-time event in prime time against the ratings of a television show that has been on the air for more than 20 years, it is clear that Sarah Palin has an audience that hasn't been properly tapped and accorded its due respect. The Sarah Palin Show could not only give Oprah a viable challenger for TV talk show queen but could also provide a conservative alternative to viewers less than enamored of her idolatry of Obama.

Just imagine what the The Sarah Palin Show might look like during a typical week.  On Monday, she could spend the hour with parents who have raised children with Down's Syndrome.  On Tuesday, she could interview women who had unexpected pregnancies and decided to keep the child instead of having an abortion.  On Wednesday, she could have some fun and spotlight hunting and fishing.  On Thursday, she could speak with small business people who have lost their livelihoods because of President Obama's dramatic spending increases.  On Friday, she could interview a person of public interest.  Suppose Sarah Palin got the chance to ask Katie Couric some questions. 

The Sarah Palin Show might not be Firing Line.  But it would be a golden opportunity for conservative ideas and values to be disseminated in the mainstream media on a daily basis.  She could reach more people in a single day than if she were to make stump speeches in front of 20,000 people 300 days a year.  This is not lost on John Ridley of NPR who told CNN:

But who's got all the sway in the Republican Party right now? It's the political pundits; it's the talk show hosts; it's the people who are not responsible to an electorate. I would not be surprised if around 2011 people are circling around Sarah Palin, saying, "please, anoint us for the road to the White House." She's never going to be president but possibly a kingmaker.

Or put another way, Sarah Palin could be to the next Republican President what Oprah was to Obama.  She could attract the sort of viewer who voted for George W. Bush twice, voted for Obama and is now having buyer's remorse.  This would undoubtedly leave leftists and liberals in a lather. 

Of course, TV talk shows don't come together from scratch.  They require producers, writers, stage directors, camera people, production assistants, set designers, etc.  Does Palin want to be hands on every aspect of the show? Or would she prefer an experienced producer to co-ordinate the technical aspects of the show while she concentrates on being the host, focusing primarily on creative content?  Would the show be in New York, Los Angeles or perhaps Peoria?  And would it be a family affair?

Palin isn't wholly unfamiliar with the workings of a television show.  Shortly after graduating from the University of Idaho with a degree in communications and journalism she worked for a time as a sportscaster at a couple of TV stations in Anchorage when she was still known as Sarah Heath. Like any other enterprise, TV talk shows bring together a cast of characters that might not always work on all eight cylinders.  Considering there is a segment of the public that would love nothing more than for Palin to fall flat on her face in anything she tries, the pressure on her to succeed would be enormous.  This is a long way from reporting on dog sled races and spring training games. 

Yet even her detractors seem to be willing to acknowledge that Palin would be a natural on television.  There's a good chance that her detractors would probably tune into The Sarah Palin Show at least in the beginning.  If her detractors are resigned to more of Sarah Palin in their future do you think they would rather see her cook a smoked salmon or smoke out President Obama in 2012?