Posted on 01/23/2011 11:12:52 PM PST by 2ndDivisionVet
Cockroaches hate the light. Sarah is shinning the light on them.
My wife maintains that in almost every way Sarah highlights the shortcomings of her critics and that is what triggers the hatred. She makes women and men feel inadequate. In a moment of clarity, I decided that I agree with my wife.
True in many cases, without a doubt.
Cannot discount, however; those she makes feel superior. Sara is 'matter out of place' which makes her a walking abomination to them (not unlike the 'cows' per Glen Beck's metaphor of ranchers/cows i.e.; Sarah is a cow; outside the fence and is being afforded 'rancher status' - worse that she even imagines she is a 'rancher' - and they HATE it. Their arrogance will not allow it.
People of the Lie fear the light of truth more than anything. And no question, Sarah carries that light.
Otherwise a good article.
They had woefully underestimated her.The liberal has many “purple moments” every day kinda of funny to see them barking like a chained mad dog.
“This shrewdness came through even in interviews where she had supposedly made a fool of herself (or was made a fool of.)”
To most people, litle shrewdness came thru. Sarah seemed unprepared and naive in the Gibson and Couric interviews. Granted, the interviewers were antagonistic, but didn't you and I see that coming? Why didn't Sarah and her handlers expect trouble from powerful leaders of our All-Dem, all the time liberal media.”\
“The only reasonable option she had was to quit the Governorship and square off as a private citizen. Doing so would stop the drain on the Alaska treasury for the defense compensation she had a right to as Governor.”
Only option? And drain on Alaska treasury? Has the amazingly-popular-among-conservatives ever heard of a legal defense fund? People like you, Armaggedon, and the article's author, and the majority of Free Republic members(?) would have been lining up at Western Union to wire Sarah cash, no questions asked, if she'd only asked.
The plan was an organized attack against Sarah Palin and her family with the intention of destroying them. These attacks were not against the governorship.
How would you have handled all this?
By the way, the TV interviews were organized not by Sarah, but by the totally inept McCain team. They were outrageously edited to put Sarah in a negative light. How would you handle that?
The Alaska ethics law does not permit legal-defense fund? Also prevent any kind of donated legal assistance? There’s almost always a way around for national-level politicians and their parties’ legions of lawyers. Big Repubs didn’t want to help Sarah? Did she even ask ‘em for help? Or did she just quit?
And how would I have handled it? I’m not a politician, will never be a politician, and mostly abhor most politicians, but in a comparable situation, I like to think I’d have taken John Milton’s advice: “ Let Truth and Falsehood grapple; who ever knew Truth put to the worse in a free and open encounter?”
Oh, and “blather”?
Are you trying to insult me? ‘Cause that’s what so many do, when arguing from a weak position.
She was hit with yet another ethics complain when she tried to open up a legal defense fund to deal with the ethics complaints.
The idea of the ethics laws were good, but there were a few loopholes that could be exploited for the type of abuse that was laid onto Gov. Palin. The loopholes could have easily been fixed by the legislature, but given how much she disrupted their cushy "corrupt bastards club", they were in no mood to lift a finger to stop the attacks.
Sarah Palin was not running on her own for a political office. She was part of and largely controlled by the McCain team. They did a remarkably inept job.
When the campaign was over the left (and rino) wing machines run out of Washington identified Sarah as a threat to their future. They marshaled historic forces against a citizen.
How would you or anyone you've ever encountered get from there to where Sarah is today?
no basis in fact?
Fact: Sarah quit.
Fact: Overwhelming majority who viewed her Gibson and Couric interviews saw Sarah as unprepared for hostile/unfair questions.
Sarah had to do the interviews. The editors created the impression they wanted!
Have you read the stuff Sarah has written? Does it indicate that she has actually read substantial stuff? Why did they try to create the impression that she didn't read anything of substance? Why did they recently ridicule her for reading and citing CS Lewis? As always it showed the critics to be the ignorant ones.
Oh, and by the way, most great strategists do not press an attack into their opponent’s strength. Instead they try to prepare the most advantageous battlefield for themselves.
If you don’t think Sarah is at war with the establishment then I can understand you blinkered view.
I believe item number 5 is the most relevant given the Presidential political landscape:
5. When their self-righteousness surfaces, liberals go on the warpath regardless of tactical considerations.
The MSM, Democrats, and GOP establishment folks looked asinine when they politicized the Tuscon tragedy and attempted to link some wider political/sociological/psychological justification for the accused murderer—the America people and more importantly, the criminal justice system view such linkage as laughable, insulting their intelligence, and, frankly disrespectful to law enforcement personnel and the prosecution of the crime.
True, her unfavorables ticked up—no doubt when the vultures of the MSM/pundits/Democrats savaged her in the initial days (they have been planning this type of strategy for over 2 years). But, she has more than enough time to regroup, counter-attack, and offer a distinctive alternative to Pres. Obama and the GOP establishment.
Unlike the daisy-flower commercial in late 64’ by LBJ against Goldwater, Gov. Palin is much more skilled and media savvy to rise above the blatant stupidity of the opposition. Not only that, that whole Tuscon incident is going to have a boomerang effect—with Gov. Palin gaining MUCH more support and strength by her own base and by others, who have been lukewarm in support up to this point.
Don’t back off, billm. You accuse me of factlessness, I re-provide the same facts.
Fish or cut bait, sink or swim, drink or drown.
“Refudiate” my facts, if you can.
I addressed this with my comments about EDITTING. This had nothing to do with Sarah Palin and everything to do with distortion by the editors. How is that her Fault???
With respect to ‘QUITTING’ I pointed out that she did not quit the field of combat, she redeployed in a more advantageous position.
Considering that she has since written 2 books done a travelogue and written many position pieces as well as given many speeches I don't think she quit at all. Neither do her opponents think she quit. Right now she is making their lives almost unbearable.
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.