Posted on 02/05/2011 12:12:57 PM PST by pissant
Palin/DeMint 2012. You know you love her. :)
The quote is from a Sarah-bashing NY Times article. Funny how Politico hides the fact that the quote came from the homos at the NYT:
http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/02/05/sarah-palin-reagan-ranch-center-speech/?ref=politics
That was way back in July. Pissant has mellowed since then. :)
Palin/Bachmann 2012
The Politico was quoting a quote in a NY Times Palin hit piece.
Politico + NY times = Crap Sandwich
Sure. I am all ears for the views of the party establishment wonks that have enthusiastically given us candidates like McCain and Dole.
LOL...
[So reasonable people can’t disagree about whether or not Gov. Palin would be a good presidental candidate?]
No one said that, and I for one could vote for a couple of the conservativves out there. I’m not into personality cults and I fully understand te danger and te need for criticism, as long as it is constructive. I just get burnt when all I see is a one trick pony, a vendetta against one candidate to the exclusion of others.
If Palin’s flaws are heinous, then certainly there should be at least equal time spent posting the flaws of people like Newt and Romney, whose abuses of conservative principles make Palin’s flaws seem miniscule.
I find it useful to have negative articles posted for dissection (pro and con), I just think there needs to be some balance. If you are posting Palin diatribes exclusively, without bothering to post anything about the conservative messiahs who are supposed to magically take her place, then that’s what ticks me off.
Ah, the Title IX brigades have arrived.
Yeah, God help us should a Conservative, pro-life, pro-gun, charismatic former governor get elected President.
Just wouldn’t do when we have our choice of Marxists, Communists, Socialists, RINOs and panty-waists to choose from?
Really, what IS the point?
God help us should a a semi-conservative, pro-LOST, pro-Amnesty, pro-Title IX, pro-TARP, pro-carbon caps, pro DADT repeal former governor get elected President.
Actually, like it or not, in recent polls Obama’s numbers have moved up over 50%, and Palin’s have moved downward. An important thing to know is how the numbers were gathered. Phone polls can reflect a bias related to the fact that older people tend to have land lines which can be accessed, and younger people often have only cell phones which are unlisted.
OK. So what? Pissant isn’t alone in his belief that giving women the right to vote was a mistake.
She doesn't let her ego get in the say of accomplishment.
But the best part is she drives the lefties bonkers:-))
:)
Pissant, I’m thinking that when you were a little kid, you ate far too many paint chips.
The problem with monomaniacally tearing down Palin (or anyone else, for that matter) is that it begs the question: Who would be better, and why?
Most rational people would concede that Palin has flaws. But then, everyone does.
I think there would be wide agreement here on FR that a primary job requirement of the next President would be to preside over a rational downsizing of the Federal Government—which will be done against the shrill screaming of all of the special interests who have bellied up to the trough of federal money.
Who’s shown the ability to stand up to the shrill screaming, and not only stay on message but to rhetorically swing back and connect a few haymakers in return?
Who’s been doing that on the national stage? Really doing it, not just lobbing a few softballs from the peanut gallery every once in a while, and generally being ignored by everybody on all sides?
I mean, besides Sarah Palin?
It appears to me to be an awfully, awfully short list. People wanting to be Presidential candidates need to be doing things to get on that list—if nothing else to give Palin some covering fire (to use a violent, uncivil metaphor). Because you absolutely, positively know that Palin’s going to give anybody else who sticks their head out of the political foxhole and starts firing for effect covering fire, too. (There I go again.)
We need a half-dozen high-profile Presidential wanna-be’s, all out there firing verbal artillery the way Palin has been doing. That is how we will know who’s serious about being the Republican Presidential nominee in 2012.
But the truth is that most of the Republican Presidential wannabes look to me to be just too danged intimidated by either the RNC Mandarins and/or by the MSM to fight the good fight.
We need “happy warriors” right now. The more, the merrier.
Mr. Billings, you relate to the candidates who won't make you feel uncomfortable. Someone who spouts conservative rhetoric but isn't a "fanatic" about it. Someone the media doesn't hate.
In other words, Mr Billings, you desire the same old candidate we always get. You want someone who is more comfortable inside-the-beltway than out in greater America. Someone who talks a good game but doesn't do a f*****g thing once they are elected. Mr Billings, our country is burning and you want to pour gasoline on the fire. WAKE UP!!!
Well said, upsdriver.
"rock-ribbed"? Gee, where on earth do we ever hear that term used? Ah, I remember. It is a phrase used by liberals to describe those people in the opposing party who they also characterize as "independent-minded" and worst of all..."mavericks".
The choice of words, to those who pay attention to liberal-speak, is not a coincidence.
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.