Posted on 11/21/2010 8:11:13 PM PST by dselig
Huckabee: Palin “May Run Away With It”
Mike Huckabee was in Iowa today for an event with an Iowa social conservative group that he made clear was a political event. In numerous statements, he has implied as strong as he is can that he is gearing up for another run at the White House in 2012. He even sent a “secret” signal to his supporters by wearing a purple tie. An inside joke among his devotes is that wearing a purple tie is a signal that he is likely running in 2012.
In his meeting with reporters, he indicated that he certainly takes a potential challenge from Sarah Palin seriously. From the Des Moines Register blog…
“No question, she will be a very, very strong presence and force, if she gets in,” Huckabee told reporters in Des Moines Sunday. “You know, she may run away with it. And that’s one of those things everyone needs to be prepared for.”
“If I get in, I prefer she not and that she endorse me,” Huckabee then joked.
Palin will be in Little Rock for her book tour on Tuesday, November 30 at 5:30 pm at Sam’s. No word if she will meet with the press but this might be something to ask her about.
Whatever the hell that means...
(Funny how I keep seeing those two buzz words pop up again and again)
I REALLY need you to explain that one. I'm pretty aware of the views of Sowell, Thomas and Williams - no so much of Cain - and I know of no "plantation mentality" in them. In fact, I find this statement pretty appalling, given the extensive service those individuals have given the country and our movement at great personal cost.
Hank
“Having said that...Palin is clearly not a very intellectually curious person.
Whatever the hell that means...
(Funny how I keep seeing those two buzz words pop up again and again)”
VR,
Kimball lifted that phrase from Moosecowski. Sad to have to plagiarize from someone of such low wattage. And then aim the insult at one of the most brilliant figures on the American political scene in my lifetime and perhaps ever.
What gives you that impression? Have you read her book? Are you at all familiar with what she accomplished in Alaska?
We will never have a real conservative nominee if we allow the beltway insiders and elites in the media pick our candidates.
They said the same thing about Reagan.
Conservatives are ALWAYS portrayed as dumb. To paraphrase Dan Quayle, "We should wear their scorn as a badge of honor."
Yes, Reagan clearly was! He wrote and spoke EXTENSIVELY on political and philosophical issues literally for decades.
Hank
I guarantee you that if Newt Gingrich, Tom Tancredo, Duncan Hunter or any other legitimate conservative (I exclude Huckster and Romney) were asked about the “Bush Doctrine” they would have known what the hell it was - which Palin clearly didn’t.
That’s just being lazy. Or not reading newspapers. Or both.
Hank
Mike Pence is a viable conservative candidate.
You should take a look at this one.
http://www.amazon.com/Race-Culture-World-Thomas-Sowell/dp/0465067972
You make some good points.
You do realize, of course, that much as I admire what he was in 1964, the whole Goldwater thing didn’t work out so well, though...right?
Hank
Thomas Sowell, Clarence Thomas, Walter Williams and Herman Cain are four examples on independent conservative Americans who happen to be black and refuse to fall into line.
How do the majority of American Blacks who follow the plantation mentality view these four who do not?
Hint: They voted in droves for a pasty white orthodox Liberal who ran against the black moderate who is now GOP chairman.
There is your clue as to how putting a conservative black man on the GOP ticket will work out.
How can someone who hangs their hat at Free Republic believe such a thing? Or, do you actually hang your hat at Politico, Huffpo, or some other disinformation site?
Thanks. Not much spare time until I’m done university, but I’ll put it at the top of my list.
Fergit it. Blacks will not vote for any plantation escapee.
Wait for her to do an actual campaign.
I checked her Alaskan campaign as Governor.
SHE’S REALLY A HIGHLY ELOQUENT POLITICIAN WITH STRICT LOVE FOR DETAILS!
If given a platform, the woman is like a non-stop walkie talkie of conservative policies put into reality ... investment and freedom to live!
Nice lib talking point, but you got it wrong.
She asked "which one", and the lib interviewer snorted. It turns out she was right to ask for clarification as there were several "Bush doctrines" and it was the interviewer (like you) who was wrong.
Do you get all your debating points from libs?
Or do you even know that's what you're doing........
“the “Bush Doctrine””
Like Bush is important enough to have a doctrine named after him? Who are you kidding? What some journalist calls “the Bush doctrine” is no more than the journalist’s surmise. It is not holy writ.
I think your aversion to Palin is a good bit more superficial than that. From your page:
“the south is probably the only real hope for America. When I was growing up, the NW suburbs of Chicago (Palatine, Schaumburg, Barrington, Rolling Meadows - that area) was a VERY conservative area. Phil Crane was our rep forever. Over the years, it became less and less so. Now it’s represented by a Democrat, Melissa Bean, which would have been positively unthinkable 20 years ago. I blame women. I’m not sure that giving them the vote was such a good idea.”
Good old fashioned misogynism. Once you’ve lived in the south a little longer, you’ll learn that you don’t have to blame women for problems you create. Chicago and Illinois are hellholes becasue they were run by a corrupt machine. They are leftist because northern, that is “yankee” ,states tend to be leftist. Chicago’s plight has no more to do with women than do the Corn Laws.
Southerners don’t blame others, much less women for their problems. They “man up” and take responsibility themselves. Why don’t you try it?
Sarah Palin has found her niche; she makes a fantastic media personality,
"Many Versions of 'Bush Doctrine' Palin's Confusion in Interview Understandable, Experts Say
By Michael Abramowitz Washington Post Staff Writer Saturday, September 13, 2008
Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin seemed puzzled Thursday when ABC News anchor Charles Gibson asked her whether she agrees with the "Bush doctrine."
"In what respect, Charlie?" she replied.
Intentionally or not, the Republican vice presidential nominee was on to something. After a brief exchange, Gibson explained that he was referring to the idea -- enshrined in a September 2002 White House strategy document -- that the United States may act militarily to counter a perceived threat emerging in another country. But that is just one version of a purported Bush doctrine advanced over the past eight years.
Peter D. Feaver, who worked on the Bush national security strategy as a staff member on the National Security Council, said he has counted as many as seven distinct Bush doctrines.snip
Liberals said it was yet another case of Palin's thin grasp on foreign policy, while conservatives replied that she handled herself well by putting the question back on Gibson.
After she asked Gibson to clarify what he meant, the anchor pressed Palin on whether the United States has "a right to make a preemptive strike against another country if we feel that country might strike us."
"Charlie," Palin replied, "if there is legitimate and enough intelligence that tells us that a strike is imminent against American people, we have every right to defend our country. In fact, the president has the obligation, the duty to defend."
Quite true. In fact Charlie Gibson had said on ABC News in 2001 that the Bush Doctrine was that we would treat countries that harbor terrorists as if they were terrorists, one of several principles described as “The Bush Doctrine”. In the Palin interview he said it was that we would attack countries before they could attack us, which is the doctrine of preemption, not something Bush originated.
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.