They're after all of us! Our wives, our children, everyone!
They're here already! YOU'RE NEXT!
Posted on 01/23/2010 10:19:54 AM PST by rabscuttle385
Paul Streitz has decided to call Sarah Palin by her real name, because she endorsed John McCain (who is trying to win a fifth term as Senator) and said she will campaign for him. Fanatic Palinites, such as the editors of the misnamed „conservatives4palin.com” website (they should rename it „liberals4palin.com”), lambasted him and called him a “backstabber”.
“If Paul Streitz’s support of Governor Palin is contingent upon his agreeing with every decision she makes or her selling out her deeply-held values, that’s unfortunate. While all support is appreciated, the governor has never been for sale. Ask the Alaska establishment, who learned that early in her political career.”
Palin has proven that she IS for sale – if one picks her for veep. She’s endorsed a despicable traitor because he chose her as his veep.
Palin is so dishonest (or so ignorant) that she didn’t even tell the truth about why she endorsed John McLame. She claimed that:
“John McCain is on fire to kill Obama’s government takeover of healthcare and that’s what I want to see.”
Which might be incorrect, because McCain favors the SAME policy on socialized medicine as Obama – he just might vote against this particular Act. McCain favors socialized medicine, as proven by Steven Warshawsky:
“McCain’s campaign website [of 2008 – ZM] demonstrates that his thinking on this issue is much closer to Hillary Clinton than Adam Smith. For example, McCain states that “controlling costs” is his top priority, and that “nothing short of a complete reform of the culture of our health system and the way we pay for it will suffice.” This is a recipe for massive government interference in the health care industry. McCain also supports universal coverage, claiming that “we can and must provide access to health care for all our citizens.” Completing the liberal trifecta, at the January 5 ABC NEWS debate, when Romney criticized McCain for “turn[ing] the pharmaceutical companies into the big bad guys,” McCain replied, “Well, they are.” Plainly, if he were president, McCain would serve as the Democrats’ “useful idiot” for their plan to impose socialized medicine on the nation.”
Also, I’ve heard from a friend that McCain will likely now try to save the socialized medicine bill. So on socialized medicine, McCain and Obama differ only about particular bills, NOT about the merits of socialized medicine itself.
What about the task of protecting the American people? No duty is more important than that one. But on that issue, McCain is also liberal and unreliable. Palin falsely claimed that:
“And his commitment and his leadership on national security to win the war on terror, that’s what we need. (…) national security, he gets it. He understands how to win.”
Palin is flat wrong. McCain is NOT committed to the task of defending the American people, and he’s not a leader on anything except liberal policies. He „doesn’t get it”. He doesn’t understand how to win the Global War on Terrorists, nor does he understand any defense issue or foreign policy issue confronting America now. I’ve written several articles pertaining to this guy, demonstrating what McCain’s specific policies are, and why they are wrong. So I’m not going to repeat those entire articles. Let me comment again on McCain’s policy on the GWOT, though, because that’s one specific issue that Palin mentioned.
John McCain does NOT say that America should attack its enemies before they attack America. He also endorsed Obama’s decision to close Guantanamo, and he opposes “enhanced interrogation techniques”, which are absolutely necessary to gain intel information and protect America.
McCain also buys the PC propaganda about the root causes of the Islamic threat. He believes that these root causes are “poverty, tyranny and despair”, and ignores what terrorists themselves say motivates them: the Quran, which contains several explicit commandments to kill nonbelievers.
In short, McCain doesn’t recognize the real nature of the Islamic threat, and he’s not prepared to combat it effectively. Anyone who isn’t prepared to combat it effectively is a person who doesn’t belong in the Senate. If the GWOT is the most important issue for you, McCain is undisputably the worst possible Senatorial candidate from Arizona.
I did not include McCain’s cretinous, liberal, anti-American policies on foreign policy issues other than the GWOT, even though I could (foreign policy is not limited to the GWOT, although Sarah Palin, as an ignorant person, doesn’t understand that). My articles about McCain refute his idiotic policies, so I just wrote a reply to what Palin explicitly said. She did not comment on McCain’s treasonous policies like nuclear disarmament and the progressive abolition of conventional weapon programs (which are necessary to protect America against China).
The failed 2008 VP candidate also said this about McCain:
“And he is a statesman, and I don’t hesitate at all to say, no.”
Which is not true. McCain is not a statesman; anyone who calls him a statesman insults real statesmen. A genuine statesman fights for the right policies, regardless of ideology; works for his country 24/7; and retires when he should.
McCain has spent the last 9 years promoting destructive liberal policies to punish the GOP for its decision to give Bush the 2000 Republican nomination; he’s been working against the US and for his liberal ideology (together with fellow liberals like Kennedy, Obama, Russ Feingold, and Hillary Clinton); and he has refused to retire – he’s vying for his fifth term as Senator. By comparison, George Washington refused to serve as President for a 3rd term, even though as of 1797, there were no presidential term limits. McCain is running to keep his salary, not to serve the American people, whose opinions are irrelevant for him.
Palin ended her statement thus:
“we do need his leadership, especially on those two fronts: Government takeover of healthcare, he wants to kill it; national security, he gets it. He understands how to win.”
See above. Her claims are false.
Whether she uttered those claims because she’s ignorant or because she knows they’re false and decided to lie for McCain, only Palin knows. Regardless of the answer to that question, she’s not qualified for the Presidency, as she has proven with these statements and other utterances. She embarrasses herself everytime she speaks. Conservatives4palin.com editors claim that she is simply behaving like a loyal person. But one’s own country is supreme to any person and any requirement for loyal individuals. When the choice is “Either the country or the person you should loyally endorse”, a real hero, a real patriot, a real statesman/stateswoman chooses the country, not the person. Palin has endorsed a strident liberal who’s trying to enrich himself with taxpayers’ money.
I was a fan of Palin myself. But I’m now convinced that she’s not a conservative, nor is she a politician qualied for the Presidency of the United States. She’s simply just another RINO endorsing another RINO. No real conservative would ever endorse McCain for the Senate.
Where are all the attacks on Scott Brown for making robocalls supporting McCain, where are the attacks on Brown for having his first meeting in DC with McCain, where are the attacks on Brown for planning on campaign stops for McCain?
A little inconsistency there. Sarah Bad, Brown Good.
Cool, I am looking forward to some great opuses when that movement falls flat on it's face. Nothing like a good purge to provide some great entertaining moments.
I've seen unflinching advocates for a strong national defense, pro-life policies, and fiscal restraint labeled RINOs because they supported an environmental measure. It's laughable.
It sure is laughable...
There are just a few "crazies" who hope to turn the whole "pack" on FRee Republic, by using the term "RINO" as a form of "political leprosy" and hoping that no other FReepers have a brain in their head and will go along with their brand of "idiocy"...
If the Republicans lost Goldwater's seat it would mean the eclipse of conservatism for a long time.
The alternative of giving McCain one more term doesn't look so bad.
Your comment is totally brilliant.
Running for office without a family name, collective bargaining or unlimited trust fund is a daunting challenge.
Pounding every GOP candidate for minor gaffes is an indication that we expect perfection from normal, regular folks. Would that each of us had the spine to run for office instead of running our fingers over the keyboards.
Spelling errors are so unforgiving.
Nice of you to post a picture of another Big RINO there.
A little inconsistency there. Sarah Bad, Brown Good.
Are we sure Tina Fey doesn't have a FReeper account here and is posting? LOL...
Tina Fey...
In 2009, Fey won an Emmy Award for her satirical portrayal of Republican vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin in a guest appearance on SNL.
I never said Sarah Palin was a RINO, now did I? I merely said (or tried to say) that this new endorsement changes nothing with regard to Palin.
Besides, your example is a reverse of McCain/Palin 2008 and is therefore null.
Nice of you to post a picture of another Big RINO there.
Ummmm.... Tina... is that you?
“If the Republicans lost Goldwater’s seat it would mean the eclipse of conservatism for a long time.
The alternative of giving McCain one more term doesn’t look so bad.”
If Hayworth is worth his salt, he will beat McCain without Palin.
Heh. You are too kind to Rabadash Rabs. I think he hasn't cracked 1% yet.
But give him a break, he may be older than mid teens though........like maybe late teens........
THANK GOD!
HE BROUGHT HER TO ALL OF US AND OUR HEARTS LIFTED.
THANK GOD JOHN HAD THE WISDOM TO PICK SARAH!!!!
And God Bless Sarah for understanding that John McCain is a true American Hero and deserves her support! wouldn't want a Sarah to be an egghead freak who had no loyalty or depth of understanding.
Well Rabscuttle has also said this so I’d expect him to honour it if it comes to fruition. Reference is to DeMint’s endorsement letter of Romney:
21 December 2009 11:41:01 · 236 of 239
rabscuttle385 to sarah fan UK
I know it’s from 2007, but there is no way I am going to even try to defend that letter of DeMint’s.
If he backs Romney in 2012, despite the flagrant failure of both Romneycare and Obamacare, then he can go to hell.
Although supporting a rino is always questionable, only fools or leftists would try to say it makes Palin herself a rino. There are clear reasons, other than agreement on policy, for her to campaign for him, painful as it is for many of us.
If Palin acts like a rino based on her policies, then she’s a rino. She has not done that. Her endorsement of McCain cuts like a knife, but it’s not enough to stop supporting her.
McCain is the one who endorsed his own opponent during the campaign. As far as I know, Palin doesn’t have it in her.
Remember, Palin advocated profiling. That’s why she’s not a rino.
My point is that Palin was comfortable with McCain’s positions before this new endorsement, so I don’t understand why there should be so much eye popping about it now.
2008 - 129 million votes cast for president.
Ummmm..., oh, that increase? Those were all the blacks who voted for the first time in their lives... LOL... [not to say anything about all the dead people...]
Obama won by 9.5 million votes. Do you know 10,000,000 people who stayed home?
Well..., I've been told by FReepers here that they wouldn't vote for McCain because he was not qualified per the Constitution, the same way Obama was not qualified... LOL...
You've got all kinds here on FRee Republic... :-)
A second to that, and a big AMEN!
I stand by my words of Dec. 21.
If DeMint backs Romney again, he can go to hell.
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.