Palin To GOP: Hit Em With Your Purse, Boys!

jenkuznicki.com ^ | 4/18/11 | Jen Kuznicki

[rae4palin]

Awesome headine! Sarah’s Saturday presidential campaign speech was the best I recall seeing, ever.

[jenk]

thank you:)

[PSYCHO-FREEP]

For starters, here is a small sample of why many do not support Palin;

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/businesstechnology/2014601450_alaska27.html

From a business standpoint, in as State with only 667,000 total population, taxing industry to the point of having a 12 Billion dollar “surplus”, confiscated and hoarded in the State Treasury, is hardly something to brag about. All it means is that the state collected excessive revenue and failed to balance those funds effectively.

When in truth, those funds should go back to the industry it over taxed for them to reinvest in future growth which will grow the economy and create more jobs. Passing that surplus out to the state residents instead, has the opposite effect. Just ask Jesse Ventura about how well that tactic worked out for him in Minnesota.

Palin is more of a Populist than a Conservative. She believes that Illegals should have a “path to citizenship”, she supports Unions (Just not the Bosses) and she believes Obama was born in Hawaii. There is also this Populist position she expressed on the use of Smoking Pot;

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2538010/posts

But most of all, if anyone believes that Palin can win by further insulting the establishment GOP, as well as countless Conservative men, by humiliating them and basically calling them wimps, are not living in reality.

The final insult, telling them to “Fight like a Girl”, as if this is an effective campaign strategy and some dynamic exclamation that will launch her into the Presidency, need to look back at other candidates who have tried similar tactics and failed as a result. (Ross Perot) Only Perot was smart enough to avoid the use of snarky Sexist rhetoric to shame voters into supporting him.

[Republic]

I will read your links...but that last comment caught my eye. If you think 'fight like a girl' is an insult, then I can understand why you think as you do completely.

You do not get Sarah.

Nothing wrong with that.

The humor and uplift of that comment combined with a reminder that girls can stand firm, too, is marvelous. This comment works on every level, for me.

I find her wording not only effective but needed. Her points are so dead on targeted it is refreshing. (moving deck chairs around on the Titantic....PERFECT!).

Her words fill me up with hope. Not Obama hope, but hope that springs from being reminded that self determination still exists. That God, individuality and freedom in the sense of not being so regulated and taxed that spirit is crunched, and self determination can be supported by our governing rules and NOT squashed into socialistic hell.

Go ahead and find her not qualified, that is ok. No one is fully qualified to be President because no one can fit the bill of each and everyone of us personally determines as crucial to the job.

Sarah makes what my vision for our nation is feel possible. I like her character and life by example and experience in governing and TRUST her to surround herself with good advisors who also love our nation. I like that in a politician and I like it in my friends.

I like how Sarah views America.

I hope she runs. And I pray for her specifically.

All that written, sorry lol, and I still have not read your links, I will.

[jennings2004]

Also, Saturday many in the periphera of the crowd were hostile, insulting, and threatening....in 2008 she was in a friendly enviroment...no, Saturday was an outstanding “into your face” of the hecklers, the Democrats, the Beltway GOP, the media, and Dear Leader...I pray for her safety and her decision to make a run...we need her integrity and common sense!

[ReneeLynn]

Pissant?

[PSYCHO-FREEP]

My post to you was not meant out of disrespect to you in any way. I am merely expressing some of the many legitimate concerns that some of us have. There are realists and Conservatives here, who avoid getting all emotional over any Political candidate. Scrutiny is a good thing. Like my Father taught me in regards to political candidates, he said; “Don't fall until you see the whites of their lies!”.

I look closely at history and actual records before I decide on any candidate. I also do not fault people for their beliefs or opinions.

But in regards to whether I “Get” Sarah or not, that is not the case. I have studied her record and even watched her perform on stage in 1984 when she was at the Miss Alaska Pageant. (She played the flute) I also lived and worked for over 20 years in Alaska and saw 4 Governors come and go. I have a very good understanding about what I believe.

But most of all, I fully respect your enthusiasm and beliefs as well. I agree that she does use divisive humor but she has a tendency to make rhetorical statements that rub a lot of people the wrong way on both sides. This is not a healthy political strategy. Especially when we need ALL forms of political support the win in 2012.

[wtc911]

ok, all the group-thinkers and you

__________________________________________

Don't kid yourself.

[Bigtigermike]

You are nuts! When the shameless GOP establishment is not worth criticizing for being limp and weak then Obama is certain to win, your hate for Palin makes you defend the GOP establishment which goes about going against TEA Party America and conservatives in general having compromise so much to Democrats- we need GOP at least to try to fight or we will lose not only in 2012 but beyond

[PSYCHO-FREEP]

Since when does simply finding valid reasons not to support a candidate, constitute hate? You are the only one reading that into your very limited view of the big picture. I do not and have NEVER hated Palin. She is just another Politician like all the others with plenty of flaws and shortcomings, all brought on by her own doing.

I am not defending the GOP establishment either, yet you read that in as well. I simply made a point that Palin will not get anywhere by alienating them, or by humiliating them.

Don't forget where the bulk of the funding and the Public support will come from with any Republican candidate. It will come from the RNC and the GOP as well as the Moderates and Independents. Palin went out of her way to ostracize them as well as insult them in her recent speech.

Unless she plans on running as an Independent herself, she needs to learn how to gather allies instead of being divisive. Her feminist jab at Conservative men in the party; “Fight like a Girl.” did nothing to advance her popularity either.

Of course the GOP is not doing a very convincing job with the budget, but it is easy for us to say sitting at our computers, not fully knowing the heat they are getting from all sides in their individual districts. The biggest problem is with the voters and the overall electorate.

[Bigtigermike]

So you are defending the GOP....just because you don’t like the messenger attacking them, you make excuses that we here don’t know all that is going on...bulls*it!!!!

We just won a historic election with people rejecting Obama and the dems, all we ask of them is to stand on principle, we are going to hell in a hand basket and you are excusing their behavior? There is no excuse, it’s time to draw a sharp clear contrast and being democrat-lite or Obama- lite or wanting the media to like the GOP is no excuse!!

You are being exposed everytime you come on here attacking Palin

[jenk]

eh, you don’t understand, moving on..

[lquist1]

“Wrong. I am not a beltway oriented voter and I do not hate Palin but I do not think that she can win, nor do I think she is qualified....

Speeches do not mean anything in the world of experience and qualification.”

I love how they always start with this “I don’t hate Palin” line, then go on to hold her to standards no one else would be held to in order to discredit her.

First off, she’s just as qualified as the current occupant of the White House, in fact much more qualified in the way of executive experience than Obama had in 2008. I think this lack of qualification argument stems from her gender, because men with that much executive experience-Gov Christie of N.J. for example, are not thought of as lacking in qualifications.

Second, I’ve had my doubts about her electability too, but they said the same thing about Reagan in 1979. Also, no matter who we nominate, the left will launch a major character assassination effort and try to tear them down, so I don’t really think we should worry too much about ratings in the polls at this point.

That reminds me, in 2007, I remember Hillary Clinton used to have really high negatives. I remember one poll in particular where 51% of respondents said they would never consider voting for her for POTUS. Does anyone doubt that she has recovered quite a bit from those negatives? I’ll bet she would have won in 2008 had she got the Dem nomination, and she would probably have a decent shot in 2012.

The point being, there is a lot of time to recover from negatives and get your message out. True, the media will be hostile at every turn, but my original point was with speeches like she made Saturday, she can reach past the media and directly to the people, like Reagan did.

As for your last line about speeches not meaning anything in the world of experience and qualifications, I can’t believe anyone would write that line with a straight face given the current White House occupant.

[wtc911]

As for your last line about speeches not meaning anything in the world of experience and qualifications, I can’t believe anyone would write that line with a straight face given the current White House occupant.

_________________________________________________

Are you suggesting that the speeches he gave somehow made him qualified and experienced? I believe that you just proved my point...and you did it with a straight face.

[lquist1]

“Are you suggesting that the speeches he gave somehow made him qualified and experienced? I believe that you just proved my point...and you did it with a straight face. “

I’m suggesting two things. First, speeches and communication are important and do indeed have a large bearing on the electability of a candidate. In the context of Mrs. Palin, my original point was that her speech Saturday was extremely good, and showed me that she may indeed have the communication skills necessary to win this thing. Of course, what happens going forward remains to be seen, but I think Saturday was a good start for her campaign (if indeed it was the launch of her campaign).

The second thing I’m suggesting is that the current White House occupant proves that voters do indeed elect people regardless of their lack of experience and qualifications and based solely on their rhetoric. I’m also saying that, given the choice between the experience, qualifications (and lack of judgment) of Obama vs the qualifications of Mrs Palin, I will take Palin hands down on all counts. Her policies are conservative and I agree with most of them, and she has several years of executive experience, so I see no reason why she is not qualified to be the GOP nominee.

Are there other good qualified choices? Sure. Herman Cain looks good to me too. Romney and Pawlenty are also qualified, but I don’t like their policies and I don’t think they’re conservative enough. For that matter, Huckabee, Daniels, Trump, Barbour, they’re all qualified. They all have executive experience and much better judgment than Obama. To me, it’s not really a matter of qualifications as much as it is policy and what direction they want to take America.

I think this notion that somehow Palin is not qualified when she has comparable experience to those I just mentioned is just a cover for the fact that you either don’t like her personally or disagree with her policies. Maybe she’s too conservative or just doesn’t have the right pedigree for you. If that’s the case, I wish you would be honest and come right out and say it. But hiding behind this “she’s not qualified” argument just doesn’t hold water, cause we all know she has similar qualifications to most of the other candidates.