Posted on 07/10/2011 1:13:27 PM PDT by Bigtigermike
I just don’t want to see her destroyed.
Sarah knows the risk. If all of the good ones didn't take the risk, we would never have any good people. We can support her as much as we can. With her character, that may just be well and good for her.
So what,,, so have I. The beast is terrified of Sarah. So what is your big idea? Who exactly will do what we want,,,and WOULDN’T be attacked just as viciously?
And also,,there is a dead, flat feeling to the repub primary just now. It’s because everyone knows itls meaningless until she enters. GAME ON,,,no substitutes.
The rest of the field already knows they are all running for the veep slot. It’s why they don’t criticize her.
“I suspect that Grizzly Huntin Mama can handle herself quite fine. She has already demonstrated that she can handle more media abuse than anyone in American history.”
Point taken, but unfortunately, that would only be the tip of the iceberg.
“Worse than the Civil War? It’s bad now, but we’ve been on a downward path for decades. Obama just sped it up.”
Our present situation is potentially worse than the Civil War. Not in terms (yet) of immediate casualties, but in terms of the fate of our people. The Civil War was fought on one side to preserve the Union, and on the other to break away from it. Neither side questioned the primacy of western civilization or it legitimacy in the broadest sense.
Today, we are struggling against elitists in both political parties, business, media and ‘education’ for the very preservation of a culture which is at least 2,500 years old.
By appearances, we are losing. If we lose, we usher in the savagery and oppression of an Ashurbanipal or Tamerlane, augmented with surveillance, coercion and control technologies which were the stuff of science fiction only a decade or two ago. We will be subjects of a totalitarian state which Stalin would have envied. The “New World Order” of transnational authority will usher in a tyranny which will set the benchmark for oppression.
Yes, this is a time in our national history comparable with Valley Forge, and in our cultural history comparable to D-Day, Lepanto or Thermophylae.
We must win. There is no other option.
Ok, so tell us. Which candidate would the media NOT unleash their fury on, and if the media doesn’t hate them, why would i vote for them?
They are going to be left with a lot of uneaten Brie and warm Chablis in their Hamptons hangouts.
With apologies to Bobby Zimmerman,Palin could simply be called “The Girl from The North Country”.
I though it violated the truth in advertising laws to have Newsweek and “high demand” in the same sentence.
We've known for years the bias of the MSM. It's truly been the past 3 years which we've seen them no longer even pretending to be journalists. Look at most print publications. Look at “JourNoLists”. Look at the alphabet networks. Look at even an entire cable network, the “lean forward” folks who routinely speak of phone calls they've received from Team Obama, with hosts claiming it's their jobs to see that Obama is successful. The election of 2012 will be a Republican nominee against the MSM AND the Democrat nominee. There's no way around that.
She's the topic of the thread. I don't have time to write about them all.
So you do not support any of the current and potential GOP field (including Rick Perry/Chris Christie in the mix)?
I'm not thrilled with any of them. The best in the list so far, at least as far as ability is concerned seems to be Santorum (note that he is NOT getting any oxygen). Believe it or not I like Gary Johnson's administrative ability, but not his understanding of cultural issues. The last guy about whom I was at all enthusiastic was Duncan Hunter in 2008. We saw what Fred Thompson's fan dance did for his chances. FReepers fell for it in droves too. I'm afraid Sarah's "campaign" is similar. It deprives oxygen to anybody behind whom we might unite.
Then who would you have run for whom you could express a preference?
As of now, there's plenty of time to build a candidate into the kind of national figure to be viable. Maybe Pence, McClintock... Jan Brewer has shown some guts, but I don't know that much about her. It's really pretty thin, thanks in large part to Carl Rove.
Right, since they've been pulling their punches until now.
Palin is fearless. You might do more to try to follow her example.
Typical breathless adolescent ardor.
My disenchantment with Sarah Palin is due to what I have heard and read from her. I've read enough of "her" book to know when a person has read the books by the people they quote and when they go to a page of quotes on the Internet to pepper their MEDIA with supposed indication of their education.
Palin has supported both carbon caps and The Law of the Sea Treaty. Defend that. Her first veto was to kill a bill that would have precluded healthcare benefits to gays and lesbians pursuant to a court order that was in direct violation of the separation of powers principle. Explain that. Palin multiplied Wasilla's debt to build a health club and "community center" when a private auditorium and 24-Hour Fitness could have done the job. Defend that. Wasilla's city budget increased 55% during her administration. Defend that. Her last State budget had a $1.36 billion deficit. Explain that. Palin's oil tax scheme is so byzantine that it chased drillers out of Alaska and back to Texas. Defend that. Sure it's easy to be a popular when the State is paying people for being State residents, but why should one industry bear such a disproportionate burden for supplying State revenue?
Further, it looks to me like spending increased during her administration rather significantly on the strength of high oil prices, and she quit just as revenues began to fall as oil prices fell.
| Fiscal Year | Expenditures (billions) | GDP (billions) |
|---|---|---|
| 2005 | $10.0 [13] | $39.3 [13] |
| 2006 | $10.8 [13] | $43.1 [13] |
| 2007 | $11.6 [13] | $44.5 [13] |
| 2008 | $12.5 [13] | $46.0 [13] |
| 2009 | $13.4* [13] | $47.5* [13] |
But besides all that, the main reason Palin has earned my disrespect is for her glowy generalizations that mean NOTHING when it comes to substantive policy decisions. Every softball interview I've seen on Hannity has left me waiting for substance. Instead, every time I hear that screechy happy talk, I just cringe. I couldn't care less what anybody else thinks.
At this point, conservatives should be advancing those whose experience, thoughtfulness, communications skills and PROVEN RECORD of both commitment to limited government and the skill and courage to enact spending cuts, I prefer Pence, Johnson, and Santorum, none of whom are supported by "GOP elites." Herman Cain sounds good, but I'm not ready to vote for a former board member of the Federal Reserve without hearing a lot more specifics.
So, I think she's either a stealth RINO (why else would McCain pick her?) or she's sufficiently malleable that the RINOs think they can sway her once she's in office. After all, the media LOVE Sarah Palin, or else they wouldn't have given her a second of air time. They know that to a politician, face time is life itself. They know that they can simultaneously poison independents, galvaniza leftist hatred, AND get a horde of frustrated teenagers charging to her rescue on white horses simply by bashing her. She's gained a great deal from all the media she's received and She knows it. How else could she have afforded that $1.7 million house she just bought in Arizona?
Ah well, love is blind.
You betcha!
It is a Palin thread; so I posted thoughts about her. That's the FR protocol. Deal with it. See above.
And where have you been for the last thirty or so years?
Nobody I’d vote for but that’s not the point. I’ll ask again, have you ever seen a Republican candidate/non-candidate receive the disgusting putrid bile that Sarah has?
Your cynicism is understandable, but consider that every President surrounds him(her)self with a wealth of smart people who are domain knowledge experts and have spent a lifetime acquiring the facts and data needed to become expert in a wide range of fields. No President could ever hope to “know everything” or even to be able to temporarily store enough mush in their own brain to satisfy your, or anyone elses, expectations.
A President is a Chief Executive. Execution requires courage, conviction, willpower, tenacity, and clarity of vision as to the goal. Sarah Palin has these qualities in the same abundance that Barack Obama lacks them. I probably can never convince you and others who share your point of view, but I would suggest the qualities that we admire in our greatest Presidents like Ronald Reagan are shared by Sarah Palin. Reagan wasn’t elected because he was a genius, but because he could create a bond with the People, and they saw in him the kind of man they wanted at the helm. Otherwise elections may as well be based on IQ test scores, and we saw how well that would work in 2008.
That doesn't sound good for MSNBC...
Cry me a river...
the infowarrior
All lies.
Gosh, and with what kind of "experts" will the GOP surround Sarah Palin? That is exactly my concern.
Reagan spent YEARS studying everything from conservative philosophy to manufacturing. Hence, he not only was not easy to snow, he had met people he could trust. Palin had that opportunity and has shown little interest in making the investment.
A President is a Chief Executive.
Spare me your high school civics lecture.
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.