Posted on 12/04/2009 7:12:18 PM PST by GVnana
Yes..John and Cindy are little, plastic people. She outclassed them and they knew it.
Indeed. As I said to a friend, have faith in the American people. Slow to anger, but the people are rising. And it’s scaring the pols now. They tried to dismiss it, the media tried to ignore and ridicule the people, even when over a million hit Washington DC from all over.
The elitists and their Soros friends have to be crushed. Faith, prayer, power to the people.
God bless these United States.
I bet she'd love to go up in one too. Maybe take lessons and fly one.
Go Sarah, go!
Sarah Palin is the spark lighting the fuse. The American Spirit is alive; it just needs some help in waking up.
We're going to need to draw a line: “Yer agin (sp) us or with us”.
I am an eternal optimist and love this blessed country and
haven't given up yet.
God bless this outstanding American woman/patriot/conservative/Christian/friend!
Their day will come. . The 300 are coming for them, . . 300 Million Citizens in the Final March on D.C.!
I’ve never denied the reality of climate change; in fact, I was the first governor to create a subcabinet position to deal specifically with the issue.
I saw the impact of changing weather patterns firsthand while serving as governor of our only Arctic state.
But while we recognize the effects of changing water levels, erosion patterns, and glacial ice melt, we cannot primarily blame man’s activities for the earth’s cyclical weather changes.
*********************
Huh? Based on these words, it appears that she buys into 1) “unnatural” climate change and 2) that humans are a partial cause.
To me, she sounds pretty wishy-washy on this issue.
Copenhagen isn’t about the environment for someone like Obama; it’s about political power. The legislation proposed by the “environmental” left has nothing to do with saving the planet. What they care about is controlling people by controlling their money. Obama doesn’t care a bit about the CRU scandal so of course he’ll go to Copenhagen. For him, bad science can still lead to power.
I don’t think this hinges on any scandal about the emails.
Sarah has the exactly right idea, but for what reason does she state it now?
She seems to state it - boycott Copenhagen - in light of the shenanigans that recently came to light through the emails. I maintain we already knew this was junk science and politically motivated. I maintain that the proponents of this nonsense who are either politicians or scientists wanting research money and fame or Al Bore types wanting to profit from it also know it is junk science.
Stay with the fact that we already know it’s junk science, emails or no emails.
This latest just helps all the more to reinforce what we already knew.
I already knew she isn’t perfect on this issue.
Back when the “global warming and it’s man’s fault” crowd had virtually taken over, she along with others on the more conservative side took a bit of a nuanced position.
I think she cannot now deny her previous words on the subject, so she incorporates her past pronouncements and actions into her current statement.
All that tells me is that she isn’t perfect on this, which I already knew.
I will take it, though. She has an open mind on the subject and recognizes the significance of email-gate and has the hutzpah to call for boycotting Copenhagen.
My problem with her statement is that it hinges boycotting Copenhagen on the email scandal. I maintain there was every reason in the world to boycott Copenhagen without the email scandal.
I’m afraid this is going to fall on deaf ears, large ears, albeit deaf ones.
She’s not speaking to Obama.
She’s speaking to YOU.
“My problem with her statement is that it hinges boycotting Copenhagen on the email scandal. I maintain there was every reason in the world to boycott Copenhagen without the email scandal.”
I hear what you’re saying but I see ClimateGATE as all the MORE reason to boycott Copenhagen. Junk science isn’t easily comprehended by the public, but nothing resonates like the scandal of corruption. Thanks to Sarah for keeping Climategate on the front burner.
That’s how the globalist elite want to consolidate and centralize their power, so that a one world government, a technocratic, plutocratic, totalitarian dictatorship can be established.
Reagan rode the issue of the Panama Canal (among others) to rising popularity among conservatives, crying, “We dug it, we own it.” Reagan lost his 1976 challenge to Ford, but did well enough to become the leading GOP candidate in 1980 against President Carter, who also backed the treaties.
Does anyone see any similarity here? Read her book because it has more of the same.
Sorry Charlie, your dog doesn’t hunt here.
Power to the people. Hmmmmm where have we heard that before being chanted from angry groups of maggot infested FM types.
If I hear those kinds of slogans being foisted to any movement in relation to conservatism I’ll just get out of the way and let the movment happen so not to step in it.
Frankly she may not be the best candidate in a presidential race. She’s not shown the depth necessary to be effective across the board to this point.Frankly, you might not be the best person to judge who will be the best candidate in a presidential race. I think your post lacks depth and a full understanding of what the people want and what it is Sarah has to offer.
Yep, the Obama Presidency will leave this country living in squaller, much as he complains about the Bush ‘mess’
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.