Weekly Standard writer and professional Sarah Palin sycophant Matthew Continetti has taken to the pages of the Washington Post to debunk five alleged “myths” about the good ex-governor. It's a fun read, as Continetti cut-and-pastes from Palin talking points to try and convince everyone that they just don't understand Palin, who's not at all polarizing, is completely electable, and would never, ever lie (he casually refers to the famous “death panels” as one of “Palin's views” instead of an outright fabrication).

You can read Continetti's lickspittling if you like, but I want to focus on just one of the so-called “myths” and Continetti's response to it, which shows pretty clearly that his arguments are not to be taken seriously. Continetti pushes back on the notion that Palin's abrupt resignation as governor was “rash,” arguing that it was a prudent response to the deteriorating political environment she returned to in Alaska after losing the 2008 election. He writes:

Palin's solution was to resign. Her agenda stood a better chance of passing if then-Lt. Gov. Sean Parnell, who shared Palin's goals, succeeded her as governor. As a private citizen, meanwhile, Palin could make enough money to pay her legal bills. And she would no longer be accused of neglecting her official duties.

Read that again. Continetti argues that Palin, by resigning as governor, could no longer be accused of neglecting her official duties as governor. A less charitable person might be inclined to point out that quitting constitutes the ultimate dereliction of official duty. But that's just cynical -- after all, the people of Alaska didn't elect her to do what's best for Alaska. They elected her to do what was best for herself.