Posted on 02/12/2011 10:43:24 AM PST by Ol' Sparky
Until very recently, I was a big Sarah Palin supporter.
I don't mean she was my first or second choice to be president.
But I really liked the gal.
I thought she was a straight shooter.
I liked her style.
I didn't think she pulled any punches.
While sometimes lacking crystal clarity on the issues, she had the right instincts, I thought.
But now I wonder.
What prompted this change of heart?
Some recent comments suggest she really doesn't comprehend how close we are to losing the culture war for the hearts and minds of Americans, particularly on the issue of how radical homosexual activism threatens the very fabric of our society.
(Excerpt) Read more at wnd.com ...
The meltdown on this forum when Caribou Barbie’s true colors are finally revealed is going to be a sight to behold. Sarah’s phoniness has been leaking out in dribs and drabs, but bigger bombshells likely await us. Let’s just hope she isn’t elected to national office before conservatives finally figure out her McLame game.
Yep. BUMP this column.
My grimace started a few weeks ago when Palin apparently went soft on the repeal of DADT and the resulting likelihood that the US military would soon be forced to accept people with mental and emotional disorders into the ranks (and the barracks). Heterosexuality is the natural default sexuality of humans. Heterosexuality is not the equal of other sexualities such as homosexuality, bestiality, necrophilia, and pedophilia. Therefore, homosexuality and the rest of the non-default sexualities (by nature) creep out most normal people. Even children understand this instinctively. The acceptance of homosexuals into the US military - - along with mandatory "sensitivity training" for everybody else - - can't possibly be helpful to the mission of the US military.
Since the time of Palin's provocative "re-tweet" to Tammy Bruce she has failed to clarify her position on this critical issue. I find this extremely disturbing. You don't mess with the US military (especially the Marines. /vanity). That is simply not negotiable as far as I'm concerned. It's a deal killer.
Palin appears to have caved to the political correctness of the scumbag Democrats and the homosexual activists on this issue. The fact that she has played coy for several weeks now speaks volumes.
Run, Jim DeMint, run!
When Sarah Palin wins the presidency I don’t know what will be more fun, watching MSNBC or coming here. Either way PDS is fascinating to watch.
Andrew Jackson quit his office as Senator and several years later he ran for president and won.
So, what's the difference?
Very well said.!!!!!!!
I’m glad to see you have such gifted insight into the inner workings of the Palin family. By your logic, every married female politician is a feminist.
He was Andrew Jackson. And he waited several years.
Those are two differences. Not to mention that there was no radio, TV, or internet then.
The sight to behold is the rabid PDS here and now. Frankly, seeing the tone and source of much of it, it becomes obvious that many women, be they left or right, are just plain jealous of Palin.
Alaska Oil and Gas Council, something like that.
Thanks. I just read your page and think perhaps you should re-post it. I'd never read all of that before and it has a great impact.
He was Andrew Jackson...
LOL, what?? Your logic is bordering on being circular. Andrew Jackson can do it because he is Andrew Jackson. Sarah Palin can't do it because she is Sarah Palin.
And he waited several years.
Andrew Jackson was elected three years and one month after he resigned from the Senate. Sarah Palin, if she is elected, would be elected three years and three months after she resigned.
Those are two differences.
No they aren't.
Not to mention that there was no radio, TV, or internet then.
Yeah, so?
Most Alaskans remember all the good things Palin done when she was gov, but she did make a couple mistakes like the gas line through Canada. Palin sure put Big Oil in their place when she was the gov though. Parnell wants to give oil companies 10 billion in tax write offs over nx 10 years, gave them 3 billion over last 4 years. Of course Oil companies want it for free or want us to pay them to take it out of the ground for us. Palin made sure they paid what they said, and didn't roll over & fill their pockets like every other gov I've watched over the last 20 years up here. I respect her integrity, no joke; have watched her since the early 90's.
Who runs most polls? That’s right, liberals. Rep. Michele Bachman, as a House member, has practically no chance of garnering the nomination or beating Mr. Obama. We don’t have a tradition of electing congressmembers to the presidency. Only two have suceeded: Abraham Lincoln in a weird five-way race just prior to our only civil war and James A. Garfield in 1880. We elect Governors, Vice Presidents,Secretaries of State/Foreign Ministers, Senators and Generals, pretty much in that order. Mr. Cain has about as much chance as I have of garnering the nomination, much less winning the election. We have NEVER, to my knowledge, elected a private citizen with none of the above titles to the White House, and probably never will.
DeMint is a conservative and probably a nice man, but he has the charisma of a toad stool. Bachman, has mothered all those foster children. Has she ever been in trouble with CPS for child abuse? We don't know. I watched her speech at CPAC. She is "flat", no spark. Herman Cain? Think Justice Thomas. He's been a businessman and we all know that business people sometimes have to venture outside the tax laws a bit in order to survive and prosper. Just sayin'.
If you think that those people will not also be isolated, ridiculed and destroyed by the left, think again. Sarah Palin has already been through the fire and she is still standing.
For some weeks now I have been trying to find someone who hates Sarah so I can use the question technique. Can't find anyone. They all love her. WV loves Sarah.
You just put the subject into the proper perspective.
Palin, According to a Democrat
Every once in a while I visit the Indiana University Water Cooler Discussion board. Today I saw a post over there that I thought would be of interest here. Keep in mind that most of the posters there are ultra liberal, so I’m sure it made their heads explode.
Here it is:
- - - - - -
CO. Hoosier, I’m not even sure that I can be classified as a “Palin fan”, but I am kind of an observer. An old school buddy of mine has worked within the Alaska legislature for the last twenty years or so. He’s a registered Democrat and has worked on projects that allowed him to cross paths with her going back when she was a city commissioner, as the mayor, and as the governor.
He told me that the picture painted of her as a mindless ideologue is about 180 degrees off base. He said that over the years, he’d probably dealt with her a couple of dozen times and that her input and/or decisions were always supported by law and not by personal beliefs.
The thing he told me about her that really peaked my interest of her was her ability to process information and then to quickly forge a plan with the information she was given. He said she was a living, breathing CPM chart. He said he had seen her on multiple occasions on a variety of subjects instantly absorb input from others and then respond with cogent solutions to problems. He said if you put her in a room with a bunch of people, the chances would be great that she’d be the smartest one in the room.
He told me that when he saw her debacle with Katie Couric, his first thought was, “who is that Sarah Palin imposter?” He said that was not the Sarah Palin he had worked with for years. He was sure that the interview was highly edited. It came out later that there was almost six hours of the interview that people didn’t see.
He told me that if I really wanted to get a feel of who she is and how she dealt with powerful people, I should read the book, “Sarah Takes On Big Oil”. It was released in October, 2008 and written by two of the state’s top oil & gas editors. The lady they described had no fear to stand toe-to-toe with heavyweights and leave them slinking away with their tales between their legs. She told them that she was the advocate of the citizens of Alaska and there would be no deal making that would adversely affect them. The big boys at Exxon-Mobile and BP folded like a cheap suit.
One other thing he told me that still amazes him was how she managed to get people to work together. According to him, she could take two people with opposing opinions, sit down with them, listen to them, offer her solutions, and both guys would leave happy and not feeling that they had compromised their position at all.
He laughed at the “she doesn’t read” meme. He said it is well known in the capitol that she was a voracious reader. She truly did read most of the national mags and newspapers, mostly on line, as well as a dozen or so energy trade magazines. According to him, there were stories about how she would take home stacks of papers and reports to prepare for a next-morning meeting and it was as if every word of those reports were stamped into her brain when she sat down at the meeting.
He told me not to be fooled by her syntax or her colloquialisms because they were not a fair barometer of her smarts. He said if people would just listen and not try to read between the lines, she was easy to understand. He said he’d love to see her and Obama in a debate about energy or even healthcare. He said she’d clean his clock. He even said that if she were given a day or two to prepare for a debate on foreign affairs, his money would still be on her.
He said she was the epitome of a leader. She assembled her staff, listened to their advice, allowed opposing ideas to be heard, and then acted accordingly. As a manager, she advocated making a plan based on the best info available, budgeting the plan, working the plan, measuring results, and quickly adjusting the plan if it was determined it wasn’t working as expected. She believed in the First Law of Holes.
He thought her biggest struggles in the 2008 campaign were the product of trying to endorse McCain’s positions on issues. She was able to voice her dissenting opinion on ANWR because her views were known, but on everything else she was expected to toe the McCain line. He said that she lacked the ability to shovel crap and sell it as perfume.
He reminded me that anyone who denies the accuracy of her “death panel” metaphor should go back and read her exact words, both her initial FB post and her rebuttal of Obama’s attack on her words. He said “read what she wrote, not what someone wrote or said what she wrote”. Her words in those posts have already been proven to be true.
He said that “divisive” is not a word that should be used to describe her. He said that was just a simple use of Alinsky’s rule #13. He said, “look at all the issues. Her position is in line with the majority on virtually all of them”.
He told me she wasn’t perfect, but if I read something or heard something that was negative, I should check it out a little closer. He shared a lot more, but I’m afraid I’ve already rambled on for too long.
Should she run in 2012? I really don’t know. Would I vote for her? It depends who she’s running against. Will she drive the agenda if she doesn’t run? Yes, for a long time.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/2591891/posts
And did you ever find out why? She was appointed as one of three members by Frank Murkowski. She saw one of the other members (a Republican) engaged in rampant corruption. She went to the governor who promised to look into it. He didn't. Palin was prohibited by state ethics laws from going public as long as she was a commission member. She resigned and blew the whistle on the corruption case.
That's probably still a bad thing to you, huh Lindy?
Mr. Joseph Farah,
Go f$$$ youself you looney toon.
link please?
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.