Posted on 02/19/2011 10:14:16 AM PST by Ol' Sparky
Edited on 02/19/2011 1:04:08 PM PST by Jim Robinson. [history]
Sorry about all the typos. I was one hand typing, holding a baby with the other.
Excellent post and you just exposed the PDSers for what they are.......everybody isn’t sold on Palin but there is a big difference in “not being sure about a candidate” and one who knowingly post liberal trash just to prove their dislike for her!
I'll second that question, and add this one:
If a liberal blog reported that a former VP at Godfather's Pizza was writing a book about Herman Cain that portrayed him as a corrupt opportunist and that, say, Paul Krugman was helping him write the book, how would you view it, and how would you view a FReeper who posted it and said he was trying to make sure we picked a strong conservative winner instead of a liberal jerk like Cain?
Would you say stuff like, "The blogger is also a former VP at Godfather's, so I'm sure this is accurate?" Would you say, "asking questions about King Herman is totally within bounds and good for the cause?"
Thanks!
I am willing to be open to other candidates - but I also think Congresscritters like Bachmann and Cain need to show they can win a statewide election before running for the White House. But I sure as heck ain't going to go to liberal attack sites for guideance on Bachmann and Cain, let alone post their crap here on FR.
Sane FReepers only post liberal crap here to dissect its idiocy - not as a means to raise conservative points of disagreement about a potential candidate.
Congresscritter=congressman.
Duncan Hunter was a congresscritter, not a senator. He got about as close as they get to winning his party's nomination. John Andersen was a congresscritter. He ran as a third party candidate in 1980. He got real close as well........you remember presidents Andersen and Hunter don't you?
Thanks! Well stated!
I like Palin and I believe that she can win but that’s beside the point, I don’t care if somebody supports Bachmann, Hermain, or one of the other potentials - we have a primary process to deal with that. My problem is to do with PDSers who just hate Palin and they do it by lying, posting liberal MSM lies or by twisting words and making false controversy about her into something real.
Like this story about the pro-choice nomination.....anybody CAN find out that sarah was giving a choice between two pro-choice picks and Sarah had to pick the least of the two evils, but somehow these punks see that she was wrong in some way (she has to be), she does wrong just by breathing-—— now the only people who think like this are the liberals and to the Palin Haters the enemy of their enemy is their friends! They don’t act like conservatives in any way
And the poster of this clatrap is whining about being attacked for supporting Bachmann and Cain ... whereas he didn’t raise that support until post 24. They can’t even be honest on their own threads.
That’s another point! These PDSers come with that “ Pissant strain” of supposedly liking Bachmann or Cain when that’s a lie! One can go back on their past post and see that they said nothing much about Bachmann or anybody else they support....but once Pissant backed away from attacks that he was misogynist against Sarah, He claim that he really liked Michele and then soon most of the known PDSers claimed that they like her as well.
This is rehashed PDS non-sense. Under Alaska law, the legislature presented her with a choice of two liberal candidates from which she HAD to choose, and so she picked the lesser of the two evils.
“Again, what principled conservative doesn’t step up and try to reform a process that leaves her with two liberal choices for the Supreme Court? Is there any evidence Palin did that?”
Listen, they just tried that not that long ago in Alaska and it failed. The people have the choice in so many years if they don’t like the judge then they can vote the judge out.
For the record the other judge was pro-abortion.
Good luck with that, huckleberry.
“This is rehashed PDS non-sense. Under Alaska law, the legislature presented her with a choice of two liberal candidates from which she HAD to choose, and so she picked the lesser of the two evils.”
I am glad to see they are spending their time of stuff that has been debunked long ago. Their smears are recycled to the point that, as insignificant as they are, I can remember nearly all of them.
This "stuff" was "got out" in 2009 and quickly discredited. Sparky here is just playing the usual PDS game of slime and squirm.
Old news. ‘Refudiated’ in 2009.
I love that word.
bookmark
Yawn. I’m not even a fan of Palin for President and even I see this as old claims hashed out in 2008.
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.