Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Did anyone just see Sarah Palin on the Factor just now? (vanity)

Posted on 05/06/2010 5:51:40 PM PDT by Borges

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 141-150 next last
To: OldDeckHand

Just make sure the person isn’t a homeschooler.


21 posted on 05/06/2010 6:03:22 PM PDT by FourPeas (God Bless America)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: OldDeckHand

The homeschooled kids who are part of “Classical Conversations” learn about the Magna Carta and the Bill of Rights and a list of Presidents. In other words, memory work in lots of history facts. It’s pretty cool. I never learned those things by heart when I was their age. The only facts I memorized were my Bible verses, and that was not in school but rather Sunday School.


22 posted on 05/06/2010 6:03:46 PM PDT by agrarianlady
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Borges

I don’t think it’s a big deal. People on both sides do it. Obama did it. Boehner did it while holding a copy of the Constitution in his hand.


23 posted on 05/06/2010 6:04:52 PM PDT by Kleon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Star Traveler
Palin Endorses Pro Life, Traditional Marriage, Military, Anti-Amnesty & 100% NRA Rated Carly Fiorina

Governor Palin is Right that Carly Fiorina is the Best Choice for California Conservatives


WHAT???? SAY IT AIN'T SO, SARAH!!!

24 posted on 05/06/2010 6:05:14 PM PDT by no dems (Palin / Rubio 2012)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Borges
She is indirectly right. It does not use the term 'unalienable rights', but it does mention privileges and immunities of citizens in the several states. The best discussion I have seen on the original meaning of those terms is Justice Clarence Thomas's dissent in Saenz v Roe:

[Justice] Washington rejected the proposition that the Privileges and Immunities Clause guaranteed equal access to all public benefits (such as the right to harvest oysters in public waters) that a State chooses to make available. Instead, he endorsed the colonial-era conception of the terms "privileges" and "immunities" concluding that Article IV encompassed only fundamental rights that belong to all citizens of the United States.

http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/historics/USSC_CR_0526_0489_ZD1.html

25 posted on 05/06/2010 6:06:03 PM PDT by Ken H
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: OldDeckHand
Perhaps someone should ask Obama what he feels about this passage:

The United States shall guarantee to every State in this
Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall
protect each of them against Invasion; and on Application
of the Legislature, or of the Executive (when the Legislature
cannot be convened) against domestic Violence.

26 posted on 05/06/2010 6:06:05 PM PDT by bitterohiogunclinger (America held hostage - day 393)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Pollster1; Borges

Another factor is the double standard, that Palin, or any other Republican, will not be given the same free pass on verbal missteps as the other side. The media will cover for their darlings, but they will zero in “like a laser beam” on any of her slips and will pound them mercilessly and non-stop.


27 posted on 05/06/2010 6:06:11 PM PDT by tarheelswamprat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: agrarianlady

Historical trivia: The Magna Carta wasn’t considered important until the late 17th century or so. Shakespeare’s play ‘King John’ doesn’t so much as mention it.


28 posted on 05/06/2010 6:06:21 PM PDT by Borges
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: agrarianlady
'I think so far one of the more careful, analytical politicians I’ve seen so far is Paul Ryan. He was a former staffer, though, which explains a lot."

Yes, he's a bright guy, as is McCotter(sp?) from Michigan. Gingrich was probably without equal when he was in the House, at least with respect to historical issues and understand of the Founding documents.

Although he frequently irritates me, Cornyn was/is a competent attorney, which is somewhat of a rarity in federal elective offices. Jeff Sessions is also another competent attorney.

On the Democrat side, I'm not sure that there's a single Dem Senator that could rattle pass many 8th grade government tests, at least since Daniel Patrick Moynihan died.

29 posted on 05/06/2010 6:06:29 PM PDT by OldDeckHand
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Kleon

And it’s irritating every single time!


30 posted on 05/06/2010 6:06:55 PM PDT by Borges
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: don-o

and me most days


31 posted on 05/06/2010 6:07:11 PM PDT by knarf (I say things that are true ... I have no proof ... but they're true)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Borges

That usually only ticks people when it is pointed out that ‘inalienable rights’ come from God.

A lot of people don’t like to be reminded of that, as they don’t believe in God, and pointing it out reminds them that THEY can’t lay claim to those ‘inalienable rights’.


32 posted on 05/06/2010 6:07:49 PM PDT by Balding_Eagle (Overproduction, one of the top five worries of the American Farmer each and every year..)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jwalsh07; Borges
The Constitution does talk about inalienable rights

Exactly. And where do these "inalienable" rights come from? The Declaration of Independence explains it: they are given by God to every human person, and cannot be taken away by any just government.

The Constitution does not give inalienable rights--or they wouldn't be truly inalienable. It recognizes their existence.

The Constitution, Like the Declaration, was based on Natural Law theory. Many people, I think rightly, consider the Declaration of Independence to be one of the foundational documents, a kind of preamble that helps to explain what certain words and phrases mean in the Constitution.

Certainly that makes more sense than to try to explain "freedom of religion" in the Bill of Rights as what amounts to freedom from religion, a "wall of separation between church and state. As SCOTUS did when it outlawed God and the Bible in our public schools.

33 posted on 05/06/2010 6:07:57 PM PDT by Cicero (Marcus Tullius)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: bitterohiogunclinger
"Perhaps someone should ask Obama what he feels about this passage:"

You're expecting Obama to comment on a document from the late 18th century? Like most classic narcissists, Barack Obama's history starts in the year of his birth. Everything that came before is just noise.

34 posted on 05/06/2010 6:09:07 PM PDT by OldDeckHand
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Balding_Eagle

I heard her talk about both.


35 posted on 05/06/2010 6:09:53 PM PDT by Truth101A
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Borges

DOI? Please define.


36 posted on 05/06/2010 6:10:08 PM PDT by cornfedcowboy (Trust in God, but empty the clip.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Fee

Isn’t the clear frontrunner Mitt Romney?


37 posted on 05/06/2010 6:10:12 PM PDT by ansel12 (Romney-"I longed in many respects to actually be in Vietnam and be representing our country there")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Fee
I>Historically, early frontrunners for a party nomination usually do not end up being nominated. Gov Reagan was not the frontrunner in the year he won the nomination. IMHO Gov Palin may not be the GOP nominee if history repeats itself, unless the times we live in do not follow conventional rules. I think it will be someone else

The times we live in are not conventional, and Palin is not the front runner because she is the party establishment favorite or because our elites see 2012 as "her turn". Her genuine grassroots support could make a difference. I don't have my heart set on "Palin or nobody", but I am a firm believer in "Palin or someone even better!"

38 posted on 05/06/2010 6:11:12 PM PDT by Pollster1 (Natural born citizen of the USA, with the birth certificate to prove it)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: no dems; All
I think Sarah needs to take some time off, go home, spend time with her kids and she and Todd make whoopee; for at least 2 or 3 weeks. She's coming unraveled a bit.
39 posted on 05/06/2010 6:11:44 PM PDT by no dems (Palin / Rubio 2012)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Borges
Inalienable Rights

Fundamental rights, including the right to practice religion, freedom of speech, due process, and equal protection of the laws, that cannot be transferred to another nor surrendered except by the person possessing them. See Bill of Rights.

She is right, your assumption of what she said, that phrase only applies the DOI, is incorrect.

40 posted on 05/06/2010 6:13:09 PM PDT by MNJohnnie (The problem with Socialism is eventually you run our of other peoples money. Lady Thatcher)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 141-150 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson