Posted on 03/17/2010 7:46:25 AM PDT by MaxCUA
THE ISSUE: Whether presidential candidates today have character, as their predecessors did. In looking for a president with the character of Dwight Eisenhower, Harry Truman and Ronald Reagan, Ralph Peters asks, "Will we ever again have a president who didn't go to an Ivy League school, who knows what it's like to struggle -- as so many Americans struggle every day -- and who's tasted defeat, but got back in the ring with his dukes up?" ("Why Our 'Post-Modern Presidents' Fail,").
The answer is "yes." Her name is Sarah Palin. etc...
(Excerpt) Read more at citizenpalin4president.blogspot.com ...
The mantra of those who have their bluff called.
“I can’t help you when YOU are the only one who knows what your motive for your harpy-ism is.”
Am I raining on your parade? Am I killing your part buzz?
I don’t hate Sarah, there are some things I like about her, but I do not think he is ready for the presidency. What bothers me is some (not all) Palin suporters on this website want us to ignore the danger signs, refuse to look at the potholes in her history, shut up and jam her down out throats.
The harder you push the harder people will push back. If Palin is so wonderful than her history, accomplishments and ability will stand on their own. But refusing to put the spotlight on them only delays the day when that happens and if you’re not ready for it it will hit you like a bus because it’s going to come from people who REALLY want to see her fail and play for keeps.
You’re inability to convince the arch-conservatives here on this website should tell you something. It borders on the incompetent.
As I wrote, we all know this little evasive move. It fools nobody. If you could actually support your statements with facts you would. You can't so you don't. That's ok ----- we understand.
Mojave: The mantra of those who have their bluff called.
______________________________________
As I wrote, we all see through this, you're not fooling anybody.
“You are definately not a team player. Eating our own is not productive.”
THis is the most outrageous thing stated on this thread so far. THis comes from someone who a couple months ago posted a thread that said anyone not supporting Palin should be kicked off FR. From someone who a couple weeks ago said that anyone not supporting Palin is not a real conservative and should be kicked out of the GOP.
You are he most ignorant, divisive, uninformed poster on this site. For you to talk about team play or eating one’s own is like Tiger Woods talking about fidelity.
I am not on your team and I am not one of your own.
If your problem is with us and not with her, why in the hell are you attacking her ?
Now you want to personally attack me...
you are running out of ammo little Bobby Boy
You underestimate your own distemper at this time. Only a fool would give you raw meat, it only makes you more vicious.
Another dodge. Running out of them, aren’t you?
I see that you came back on the thread but didn’t answer the simple question posed earlier based on your repeated statement that Palin is the most qualified to be POTUS...
“Based on what exactly? What about her CV gives you the idea that 70,000,000 Americans will decide that she has the expertise, knowledge and experience to pull the world’s largest economy back from the brink and fight two wars and deal with the Mid-East and deal with the Asian Dragon and deal with a resurgent, aggressive Russia and deal with a collapsing European Union and.....”
See, the thing you should be thinking about is this...If you can’t provide a convincing argument on Palin’s qualifications to accomplish all the above and more, and at the same time, here on a conservative site then how in God’s name do you expect tens of millions of moderate/middle/independent voters to be persuaded?
That, my young friend, is the Palin problem....when the emotion is stripped away there’s just not very much in the way of genuine POTUS class experience or expertise.
The fact that it’s so hard to get an answer to that question from these people is probably the single thing that burns me the most. If you don’t like Palin, tell me who. “I don’t know” is not an answer. I don’t know what I Don’t Know’s policy positions are. Therefore, I can’t have an opinion one way or the other on I Don’t Know. I can’t cut checks for I Don’t Know. I can’t go door to door or make calls for I Don’t Know. And ultimately I can’t vote for I Don’t Know. And no, it’s not really that long from now ‘til November 2012, so waiting out in the patch until October 2012 for the Great Pumpkin to show up is not really an option. I can tell you that I consider none of the prospects I’m aware of right now that much better than her that she doesn’t even belong in the discussion. Not Romney. Not Huckabee. Not anybody else. Nobody. When it comes to the guys holding over from the ‘08 primary field, never mind being better than Palin, I think I’d need to see them step it up to prove they’re better than John McCain.
(Am I getting through to you, Mister Beale?)
Prove me wrong, people. Cutting her down is not doing that. It’s not making any of these other guys look better. At all.
I've done research on Palin’s history and some of it is good and some of it bad. Her supporters want to ignore the bad as if it didn't exist and respond by “attacking” the messengers in the most despicable and childish ways as if that will put a lid on the questions. It may for a while, particularly here on FR, but eventually all of it will come out and it won't be at the most beneficial moment for you or Sarah.
You're better off discussing it now like an adult rather than trying to quash it like Nixon did in Watergate. At least then when the A-team players use it you'll be ready. At this point you'll end up like deer in the headlights when it happens and end up complaining about how unfair it all is and how everyone hates Sarah and that was why she was taken down...because everyone is “afraid of her”.
Let me tell you one thing, nobody is afraid of Sarah with the possible exception of her primary opponents whom she might defeat. I am certain that if the dems could pick the candidate they have to go up against in ‘12 if would be Palin. She is absolutely the most vulnerable.
95% of my negative comments are directed at or originate with things that her most ardent supporters claim. IMO many of them are spun, skewed or outright fabrications of her history an accomplishments. Criticizing comments by her supporters is not necessarily criticizing Palin. It might look like it to you but that is because you are so detached from reality and so blinded y Palin’s star power you now have an inability to recognize not only motivations but also the truth.
I've criticized Palin when she has said or done dumb things (from a political stance or when she herself mischaracterizes her record). It started with her comments about the bridge to no where. When she looked me in the eye and made it appear as if she was always against it, and the reasons why, I knew she was lying to my face. From there on I started doing research on not only her claims but the glowing comments and claims of her supporters. What I found is that many times the hype and spin didn't agree with the reality.
The public image of Palin for the most part as a PR and marketing inspired sleight of hand. I'm not saying she is bad, evil or unaccomplished in some areas. But if were to decide who we will support to run in ‘12, and hopefully win, us as pilots need to know the condition of our aircraft.
Ardent Palin supporters, Palinistas, are keeping us from doing that. Why I don't know (but I got some ideas). But that isn't;t a good place to be in when deciding who may be the next leader of the free world and advocate on our behalf.
We need to know the complete story, warts and all. Keeping people from seeing those warts may end up with us making the wrong decision.
And that could be the most catastrophic thing of all.
Thank you.
“Now you want to personally attack me...”
Wow. I mention things you have done and said in the past that may be unflattering for you, which you didn’t deny or even offer a mitigating excuse, and that amounts to an “attack”.
Now I understand your definition. An attack on Palin is anything unflattering no matter how real or truthful it may be.
That explains quite a bit for me. I now understand Palinistas a little better.
Of course that doesn’t make your strategy any less pathtetic.
You could have spent the time finding your own facts. But your cherish madness like some toddler’s cherishes a blanket. You can’t take in any facts in that emotionality.
I challenge you come up with FIVE solid, factual reasons why MOST folks who are sane very much like Palin.
Is this a replay of Lot at Soddom and Gomorrah?
There’s hope for you, maybe.
You’re welcome.
Look at your posts and the posts of your allies on any Palin thread, dude.
BTW, you don't have to leave a space between the last word and the question mark.
We know why people like this poster believe Palin is the most qualified for POTUS, and it has nothing, absolutley nothing to do with politics.
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.