Ah ... 'splains everything.
Posted on 02/23/2010 7:04:04 AM PST by rabscuttle385
About that airplane incident - the OTHER fellow is saying that Romney was harrassing him FIRST!
Ah ... 'splains everything.
You slander Sarah Palin and talk about her as though you were in a locker room with fellow impotents. You wouldn’t dare to say the nasty things about her you post here to her face or in front of her husband, but you have no problem slurring here anonymously.
You haven’t liked her from day one and that’s fine. You bought into ‘trooper-gate’ so I have determined that you likely have problems with strong women...lol, and I predict that you will next tell me that, “oh no, it’s just Sarah that’s not qualified, you like Michelle Bachmann.” Never mind that Sarah Palin was the governor of our largest state, and Michelle Bachmann is also a very smart and accomplished woman, but she is a US Representative of one district in Minnesota.
You do not tell the truth about Sarah Palin. In fact, you lie and you use nasty language that completely uncalled for.
Stop lying, Mitt. Unlike your posts, Capuchin,
the critiques of the RINOs are factual and documented.
No, I did like her on Day One. You’ve rummaged through posts from 18 months ago, you should know that. I loved the pick by McCain and supported her throughout the camapaign.
Back then I chalked her up as just a novice that needed polishing, but I generally thought she was good for the conservative movement and would make a good candidate down the row. I was wrong.
She’s supposedly been preparing for a Presidential campaign but I’ve been extremely disappointed by her inability to soak-up information and work on her presentation.
She misled on her Bridge to Nowhere position and I covered up my eyes. I covered up my eyes to several other issues. I opened them up and looked at her objectively and what I saw was a not presidential timber. I couldn’t believe I let my view of her become so warped.
I may let my posts recently go a little over the top, but it’s simply a counter to the absurd ramblings of Palin-Bots. on here who want to bash, pick apart, and write-off every other candidate because of 1 or 2 disagreements.
My posts are a response to the group think mentality that has taken a firm hold of Free Republic. People are letting their raw emotions take over instead of rationally thinking with their heads. Acting on emotions is what Democrats do. It’s what got Obama elected. It’s time conservatives on Free Republic breaks away from the trap of Palin Group Think and starts thinking rationally.
Sarah is young. She’ll be 48 in 2012. A pup by political standards. That she would throw herself into another highly contentious political race and potentially take over the most demanding job in the world while having to raise and neglect two young children: Piper (age 11 in 2012), Trig (age 4 in 2012), shows me how irrational she actually is.
Don’t give me the garbage about how women can work and raise a family. The President of the United States is a 24 hour job. It’s not the same as the Governor of Alaska. She will hardly ever be there for her two youngest children in the most important developmental years of their lives.
That she is even contemplating running for President under such circumstances frightens me and makes me question her sanity.
Well, thank you for your reasonable and courteous reply. Indeed, your posts have gone way over the top and while I have no idea why you think it’s necessary to counter the enthusiasm of Sarah’s ardent supporters, that’s entirely up to you. My issue with you is the language you use to describe her.
Like I’ve already told you, I support Sarah, but I am not an emotional supporter. I’m not convinced she is going to run, but I’m also not convinced she’s not going to run. She is sending mixed signals and at this juncture, I think that’s precisely the right move on her part.
She gives great speeches and she’s honing her speaking skills on Fox New Channel. I don’t know if she’s preparing herself for a run at elected office or if she’s intent on pursuing a career at Fox. Either way, she’s our party’s star and nobody else attracts crowds and media attention and she can change the national dialogue on any issue by simply posting a short essay on her FaceBook page.
FWIW, I see election 2012 as coming down to simply this: If Sarah is the Republican nominee, she need only convince the majority of voters that she can do a better job than Obama.
Of course, the same simple task will apply to whomever the GOP nominates.
Well, eventually everybody did, except maybe Ron Paul.
No. It was Team Romney and Team McCain that got Obama elected.
See post #87.
Palin’s campaign ads sing McCain’s praises. They are sickening.
I think she suffers that flaw that many humans have — loyalty. I could think of worse flaws. And I hope that our flawed border is sealed up tight enough that McCain has a conniption fit.
Levin doesn’t echo. He just happens to agree with Rush.
Bimbo, a silly and or a promiscuous woman.
Nice.
(Wink. Wink. We all get that from you.)
Compare contrast Palin vis a vis Margret Thatcher.
Don’t you always get the feeling we always have the same, no profile, ever, Mitt-botts? Their posts always have the same textual feel for them. Witless, broad condemnations then when factually countered, a quick Scarlett O’Hara fiddle dee dee skipping to another gratuitous assertion.
Give her a role as RNC Chairman or another fundraising capability. She shouldn’t be running for office unless she wants to take Murkowski’s seat.
LOL.. Palin don’t hold a match to Margaret Thatcher. That’s an embarassing comparison.
RNC Chair has been suggested and I’m certain it’s her for the taking, but she is calling her own shots now, so for thge rest of us it’s a watch, wait and see. I’m content with that.
Margret Thatcher was called........( let’s see if you know the famous phrase O Knowledgeable One )
Who died and made you Vote Pope?
RNC is a outdated office. There is no need in this era of cell phones, Internet for it. The GOP doesn’t need donations, they need spine and attractive popular candidates.
If money meant anything Perot, Forbes and Romney would of been elected.
Popular beats money every time.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.