Posted on 06/16/2010 8:33:50 AM PDT by Clintonfatigued
Actually, the bigger question is why her PAC donated $4,800 to Murkowski for the 2010 election ($2,400 each for the primary and the general).
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2326860/posts
It was "good" for SARAH at the time! Kind of like her support of McCain...no principles, no values, just good 'ol fashioned hardball POLITICS!
According to Palin, "she had SarahPAC contribute to Murkowski's campaign primarily to dispel rumors that she would challenge Lisa Murkowski for the U.S. Senate."
http://alaskapride.blogspot.com/2010/06/sarah-palin-announces-endorsement-of.html
“According to Palin, “she had SarahPAC contribute to Murkowski’s campaign primarily to dispel rumors that she would challenge Lisa Murkowski for the U.S. Senate.”
Just like her “I didn’t endorse Murkowski in the 2004 election because my son asked me to step out of the limelight. Therefore, I am endorsing Murkowski’s opponent, because, you know, that should keep me even more out of the limelight and my supporters will believe any shat on a shingle I serve up to them. And, my hand told me so.”
Actually I’m surprised she didn’t say “I am contributing to Lisa because it’s best for the people of Alaska and Trig told me she didn’t want me getting back in the limelight.”
Ooops...he.
You posted here as some "superior intellectual" who had all the facts at this command based on your "10 years study" of the issues. Yet your "facts" have been documented to be made up nonsense.
You don't now get to continue posturing as a know-it-all when you are prove a liar. You have to actually provide documented evidence to back up your claims not just continue to rant and posture.
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.