Posted on 01/20/2010 10:03:11 PM PST by AKReportz
people are stupid if they don't understand that. if anything Palin will make Mccain more conservative. so give Sarah a free pass on her support of him. it's really not that big a deal.
The modesty is admirable, but Palin saved McCain.
The night of her national debut was unique, outstanding. I haven’t seen anything quite like it since - from anyone, including Ms Modesty.
First Alaskans put Sarah Palin in office to where she was in a position to be picked.
McCain has never been loyal to Alaska so by Palin being loyal to McCain, she is being disloyal to the Alaskans who put her there.
McCain at this time, has not changed his stance on ANWR or other issues like cap and trade that hinder developing the heavy oil in Alaska.
Loyalist were also loyal to the British Crown and who did they fight?
Please spare us the loyal B.S.
McCain tried to legalized an invasion of his own people for personal gain.
I will NEVER forget that....EVER!!!!
I can only speak for myself, but if she campaigns for mccane she has lost my support. I believed that she was driven by principals, but it turns out she is just another politician.
I’m not exactly sure how pro-life he is (I have heard that he is wishy-washy on that subject), but he is pro-illegal immigration, he is an internationalist who seeks to eliminate the borders of the US (by being a member of the Council on Foreign Relations), he has little respect for the 1st & 2nd Amendments (McCain/Feingold & gun control), he is insultive to those who are more conservative than he is (I was DEEPLY offended when he said “Thank God & Greyhound he’s gone” when Pat Buchanan left the GOP in the mid-90’s or so), & he doesn’t have the temperment nor the rationality to be POTUS.
“McCain has never been loyal to Alaska so by Palin being loyal to McCain, she is being disloyal to the Alaskans who put her there.”
I think you should spare us the BS with this tortured logic.
McCain is not reliable. McCain has but few firm principles. Association with McCain will cast doubts on Sarah’s reliability.
>> I have serious doubts as to Sarah’s qualifications or her ambitions to run for President in ‘12. She needs experience on the national level for that
I’m confused. Why does Sarah Palin need “experience on the national level”, in your view, when the last THREE presidents spanning the last EIGHTEEN years — Bambi, W, and Clintoon — had a COMBINED TOTAL of ONE year of national experience before they elected? (and the one guy with any national experience whatsoever — that would be Bambi — is unarguably the worst POTUS of the three).
I think history has outed your premise as unsupported, naive and unfounded.
And what about Ronald Reagan?
Best president ever!
National experience before elected President? ZERO
From the evidence, I’m beginning to think that your touted “national experience” isn’t a requirement, but rather, a DETRIMENT.
Back to that again? I feel like I'm talking to a cinder block.
One last time: Loyalty is a "principle." One does not 'lay aside' a principle when acting upon principle... it is a mutually inclusive impossibility, and you are letting either your hormones or your prejudices cloud your logic. Please stop.
You are advancing neither your own image nor this nation's well being. The time for this petty, contradictory nitpicking is long passed, and I'm sure you have better ways to use your time and resources than to paint yourself as an irrational, irrelevent footnote.
;-/
Nice personal attack. Full of sound and fury, signifying..well..you know.
I find it humorous that Palin is becoming to the right what Obama is to the left. You’re willing to stick up for her no matter what she does. Do what you want. I’m telling you that this will hurt her if she has future political aspirations. Personally, I don’t think she does. I think she can do much more from outside, but this ain’t a good start.
Have a good day.
The Loyalists "where" saying what... that they didn't understand why you can't type, or why you back same-sex marriage? To be completely honest, I don't understand either.
;-)
And I'm telling you it won't. You have the upper hand, because by merely repeating this inanity enough times you can encourage it's actually coming true. Which is sad, because whether or not she repays her debt of loyalty to McCain for giving her the national spotlight, it is that national spotlight whcih gives her the best chance out of all the GOP hopefuls of helping to deliver America from those who would destroy our great nation.
Talk about principles. You have NONE!
It is apparently more important for you to grind your senseless axe against Palin than it is for her to help our country be taken back from the Libtards. I spit on you.
Time alone will tell which of us was right, and I will bookmark this thread, and we will revisit this issue when the dust settles. Now you can get back to destroying Palin with the rest of the Dimbecile Libtards.
Nice job. You must be real proud. Keep it up.
;-/
WITHOUT SARAH PALIN MCAIN WOULD HAVE MADE BOB DOLE’S CAMPAIGN LOOK LIKE THE MOST BRILLIANT CAMPAIGN EVER ...
I think he just wants someone to stand up for something no matter what the cost, she should throw McCain overboard and not feel guilty over it one bit, he’s been in the enemy camp for far to long, remember, HE chose HER because HE needed HER and it’s the only thing that kept his campaign from looking like the Exxon Valdez fetching up terra-firma ...
1) Experience as a business leader; Ross Perot is an example of that kind of experience, although I must be quick to point out I don't believe it automatically made him qualified.
2) Experience such as George Bush I had. He had some as a representative in Congress, but that pales in comparison to the appointed positions he held at the national level.
3) Experience as governor of a large state. Bush II and Reagan are examples of this. (Don't get me started on BC, please. He turned me into a Republican.)
4) Experience as a high-ranking military leader.
Sarah has proven to my satisfaction to be an outstanding leader with integrity and the right ideas, but 3 years as Governor of Alaska, with it's small population, doesn't mean enough to me. When I said she needs national experience, it is because I can't see her qualifying in the other three ways very easily, although I think she could successfully run a large coporation or a large state. I was thinking that she should relocate to Idaho, where she has roots, and run for Senator.
After all is said and done, I would vote for her in a heartbeat over any conceivable Democrat. However, she needs credibility with enough independents, RINOs and commonsense Democrats if she is to make a serious run. Perhaps her tenure at Fox could fix that, but I am not sure.
She is only 46, so she has the time to prepare for a run, but 2012 is probably too soon. But I must partially concede your point - George Washington had NO experience as a military commander. In the beginning he made some awful blunders, but was a quick study and we know the historical results. By the time the American Revolution was won, he had so proved himself that he became our first President virtually by acclamation!
the loyalist were loyal to the crown. Palin is a loyal to an idiot...
I think you should spare us from your idiotic ideas on Palin being loyal to an idiot.
I understand Sarah’s feeling loyal to him, but for amnesty and renewed talk about healthcare takeover he has to go.
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.