Posted on 09/05/2011 5:05:41 PM PDT by indianrightwinger
Sarah Palin stirs the pot but doesn’t announce By Jennifer Rubin Sarah Palin didn’t announce her candidacy for president Saturday at a Tea Party gathering in Iowa. But she did complicate matters for front-runner Texas Gov. Rick Perry, suggesting an actual strategy may be at work: If Perry stumbles, she might get into the race. But don’t bet on it.
Mitt Romney and Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.) might want to sent Palin some flowers. She did an enormous favor for them in making the argument against “crony capitalism,” one of the most potent arguments against Perry. As this report observed:
“We’re celebrating red, white and blue America!” she began her speech, amid the sounds of cheering and what sounded suspiciously like a vuvuzela. After painting a dire picture of the American economy as it stands today, she railed against President Obama: “Is this what you call winning the future? I call it
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
Your language and ad hominem remarks are unacceptable.
Who assigned you “posting police” duty? You are not really Ms. Hull from 8th grade are you?
Your PDS friends deserve worse, but I am being nicer than they deserve.
***********************************
That's as it should be, imho. We're fortunate to have so very many mature and intelligent FReepers. :)
Try to be polite. It tends to imply good breeding and educational accomplishments.
It is highly debatable whether or not she has trashed Rick Perry.
A few Palin supporters would like to THINK she was referring to Rick Perry with some of her Labor Day comments about the federal government and cronyism, but it would have to be a far stretch to transfer descriptions of Obama's Chicago cronyism in D.C. to Rick Perry... that is unless one simple did that in one's mind to try to make it appear so.
Also helps to link to “something that backs up your point”, not what biki used to make a very lame point.
That is a good point.. and most (if not all) of the Palin supporters tend to be on the polite side (I am sure there are a couple that aren’t)...
But it makes a big difference in the civility, doesn’t it?
I mean, who wants to reply to someone that is rude and resort to name calling and meaningless attacks?
Isn’t that what the libs do when they can’t win an argument?
But it makes a big difference in the civility, doesn’t it?
I mean, who wants to reply to someone that is rude and resort to name calling and meaningless attacks?
Isn’t that what the libs do when they can’t win an argument?
*****************************************
Even a brief visit to liberal sites confirms this. Offensive language, poor grammar, substandard spelling and an inability to comprehend issues is prevalent there. I believe that we expect something more here on Free Republic.
You asked for proof. Bikkuri gave you links. I don’t see a problem.
"Now that’s a lie I won’t let pass. I am strong both for Perry and Palin and I have not seen one single Palin thread where anyone supporting Perry has run down Palin."
"STFU", but you were an exception because I did make a statement and you did ask for proof, not exactly civil about it though.
Here’s you proof > http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2774438/posts
Don’t ever say a damn thing about some Perry suppporter saying doodly pantywaist things about Palin. Every one of these buttbrains with the dishonorable posts on that thread claim to be Palin supporters.
Here’s you proof > http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2774438/posts
Don’t ever say a damn thing about some Perry suppporter saying doodly pantywaist things about Palin. Every one of these buttbrains with the dishonorable posts on that thread claim to be Palin supporters.
There is trolling by both sides. However Palin has been vetted for the last 3 years. Perrys colonoscopy has just begun. Better done by us than the MSM and Obama. We should know ALL the candidates faults and weaknesses. NO Oct 2012 surprises!
Actually, you said it best in one of your replies to CGG, “2 wrongs doesn’t make it right”..
Very well said.
No, as I pointed out once before -- Deborah Medina's usefulness was limited to being a Not Perry. Strategically putting her in the governor's chair would have disfranchised the high rollers and let someone else have a turn writing laws. She'd have been weak, but then we have a weak-governor system, so the damage would be small, but the gains of getting rid of Perry's Pals would be significant.
Now we're stuck with all these guys going up to DC with Rick and looting the national treasury and economy instead of the Texas one.
We're talking about the future of our country and our children. We have ONE shot to get it right.
What I'm looking forward to is Steven Bannon's HUGE reveal 30 days from the Iowa caucus. He referred to it once and hasn't mentioned it again. But he said it would change everything.
Palin will wait to see how Perry does in the debates. Then she will assess the likelihood that moderates will overcome their uneasiness with her after watching her commercials and movie. If she thinks she can beat Perry in a debate, and if her internal research shows she can overcome her negatives, then she will run. The only bad news would be if she split the conservative vote and Mitt won the nomination.
IMHO
Palins last trial by fire was 23,000 emails. She passed. Would the other candidates? That kind of trial is coming. Palin was a private citizen when the left pulled that stunt. What do people think they are going to do to the known candidates? Nothing?
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.