Posted on 08/18/2010 2:45:01 PM PDT by onyx
Sarah is going to alienate more voters than she wins with her gender bender foolishness. She needs to cease and desist with the nonsense.
What are you on about?
There is no question that Sarah can express herself very well about something women should be proud to be a part of today. History shows that women went through a lot in the past and have come a long way. So I'm grateful to those who have made it possible for me to be where I am today without being belittled or abused just because I am woman.
God bless their souls, and God bless Sarah Palin for reminding us of that fact.
Hey Sharky, don’t expect a straight answer from a 24/7 Sarah-obsessed poster. As you can see, their objective isn’t to deal with the facts but rather to spread disinformation and obfuscate the truth to support and advance their agenda. Speaking of cultists, you couldn’t have found a more dedicated anti Palin cultist.
Is there any basis for saying this? Some more data (different polls or case studies) to support that conclusion, perhaps? Or is this one more example of talking out of your behind, as usual?
Looks like he is in dire need of some good TLC at home (or wherever he can get it), LOL. All those pent up emotions and frustrations are finding their way on FR and particularly on the Sarah threads.
As Sarah makes more endorsements and in particular after this screed, it is becoming clearer to me she is walking the feminazi path; all but declaring a gender war. Framing it nicely as a celebration of women's suffrage doesn't change the fact she is basing her preferences on gender. How is it different from the race baiting, class warfare, victimology meme of the left? I thought that was their stock-in-trade. No good will come of it.
Republican Senator Lisa Murkowski would disagree with you since Palin endorsed Joe Miller, Senator Kay Bailey Hutchinson would disagree with you since Palin endorsed Rick Perry, and poor Didi Scozzafava lost the Palin endorsement to a man from a third party.
I think we’ve already discussed the three exceptions you point out. Plausible explanations for breaking the “gender” pattern are available for each one to anyone caring to look.
You aren’t very convincing for a conspiracy guy.
And if you were being honest with yourself(and me) you would consider potential rationales for these exceptions to the gender rule re the three outliers. Did I not cover this with you before???
I don’t know, I don’t recognize your name, but I’m not much interested in your conspiracy theories and If I have had to read your explanations once already, then I sure don’t want to do it again.
For some it takes more than one reading; some never get it. Why? Because they don't want to. ;^)
Why do you conspiracy guys do this, I showed you examples that don’t fit your theory so you start posting vague, cryptic stuff that know one knows what it means.
I really do not know what your posts are supposed to be about.
Yes you do; you just don't want to admit it...
I can't believe it either.
I'm now awaiting the obligatory posting of Michael Reagan's "Welcome Back, Dad" article from two years ago (a lot has happened since then).
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.