Which raises the question, why would you be pushing a meme you cannot possibly believe yourself to be true? Could it be you want to actively mislead people with weaker reading and research skills? But if so, mislead them into what? Into thinking Palin isn't running? That not working, as the Palin hive is alive and well and looking to the primary filing deadlines just like everyone else.
Or is it just to use the FR platform to create a false impression of Sarah herself for the broader, undecided segment of the electorate? That won’t work either. The moment Palin enters the race, all bets are off. Some phony memes like this may carry some small residual effect for a while, but as we have seen with Palin, she is Teflon with these “false light” attacks, and they will all fade in the light of truth. From truth to liberty and from liberty to truth.
There are numerous articles of a SP time frame of announcement to announce or not announce or not run,or to indeed run.Just because someone found one interview that said Sept. Oct. and others read (or saw the interview) that was more widely known;to say 'by the end of Sept.' (or some such language don't sue me)does not mean anyone has any ill intentions to create a false platform or impression of SP.
It is SP causing the misconceptions and confusion because she is all over the place and confusing as to what it is she may or not be doing.In which BTW: In this forum, We have been told by the supposed SP experts of her every move; that SP is doing this on purpose as it is a part of the plan to eliminate the MSM and GOP yet you somehow are now using a broad brush to paint ill intent of those that dare question when the already given theory is SP is doing this on purpose.
Not at all. I simply believe that those touting the fake September 30th deadline meme are way too intelligent to be making such a simple-minded mistake. It can't be. CGG is too competent to be misled into thinking any of the general timeframe talk was intended to be precise and committal. In general, none of you are fools.
Therefore, the only reasonable conclusion it that it has to be intentional, a willful misreading of the text (or careful ommissions in the case of RedState). Yes, FR has a few losers, but generally we are well regarded as a conservative hub because we reach higher. And we do, because we can. All I'm asking for is that FReepers live up to their own hard-earned and well deserved reputation for dealing in truth.