Earthquake? Governor Palin Changes Facebook Status From ‘Republican’ to ‘Conservative’

Ok guys … Is this just a minor thing? Or a big deal? I’ll let you speculate on what it means ….

I was walking through the grocery store earlier today when I received a text message from a close friend asking me if I had taken note of the change on Sarah Palin’s Facebook page. I confessed that it had been an exceptionally busy day and that I had not looked at Palin’s page today. My friend then brought to my attention that under the “Info” link, Palin’s political views have been changed from “Republican” to “Conservative”. For a brief moment, it didn’t phase me as I am also a registered Republican but I chose to list “Conservative” on my Facebook page as my own political view because in my eyes, it more aptly describes my values.

I suppose one could draw a multitude of conclusions regarding this status change. I know that I certainly have. You can be certain that any move Sarah Palin makes has been well thought out and is with purpose. Could she possibly be sending a message to the RNC that they need to strengthen the conservative planks of the Republican party? Perhaps her promise of “sudden and relentless reform” as addressed in her Indianola speech and more recently in her October 7th St. Louis speech is a sign that as in the past, neither party is safe from her scrunity.

>I went over to a business contact’s house for a job the other day (in the arts) and front & center on the console was a picture of the Obama family all smiling. God I almost spewed the coffee from my mouth. These libs are just whacked!!! <

ROFL!!

You have no idea how many times I’m in a business meeting for new contracts and these clowns across the room inject their worship for the kenyan klown. The devil on my shoulder kept telling me to strangle these lib bastards right across the table.

Now I just show my hatred by obviously looking up and frowning and the other party gets it...until I jack up the contracts more in our favor. I am a vindictive right-wing pr*ck in the wrong city.

>LOL Pretty funny. To say something like that to a room full of libs you must be a really big guy or you were armed.>

I’m 6 ft tall and I hate libs. As a matter of fact, I even tried to “steal” one of the girlfriends of one of the loud Dems in the room just to make more of a point.

Right in front of him. Told the brunette, “Don’t you know Odumbo won’t be prez next year? Quit hanging out with this loser Obama ass-kisser and let’s go to the Ivy.” I’m not making it up. Jackhole hit me on the shoulder to smoke outside when me and my bud were going in for drinks and I...was...bored :)

I would submit, that every “church” has sinners/flawed members in it, if it doesn’t, then it isn’t a true “church”. I’m sure you agree; I guess the question that may remain is what percentage are “sinners”, and which are in a state of grace. But that’s not really an issue, as a true Church can not and is not affected by that, as a true Church is guided and protected by the Holy Spirit, who can and does do as He pleases with the members, despite the sin within.

Consider Donna’s later point again. I too am Catholic, yet half of my Church are Democrats, of those, I’d bet maybe at least half are radical leftists (on average nationally).

So is membership in the Catholic church ok? If you say no, you clearly have some “number” in mind of “acceptable amount of sinners” in a Church body, so, which number is this and how do you come to such a conclusion?

If you say “yes”, then why is Catholicism ok, but why is Cain’s particular Baptist denomination not ok?

The point I’m trying to make is, and I believe this wholeheartedly, maybe Cain is trying to do something similar that I and other Catholics are trying to do in our Church: bring about a return to more traditional, “conservative” values within my (his) church. Just like many Republicans are trying to right the party.

Note, this is my reply to your point, which, don’t get me wrong, I believe is of concern. As I’ve said in the past, one’s faith is a powerful motivator for one’s daily life choices (or it should be). Thus, church affiliation is very important, IMO. It was clearly a good indicator of what kind of man Obama turned out to be.

What I tend to believe though, given the man I believe Herman Cain to be, is that he isn’t content with the slavish mentality in his own church either, much less in the country. I’m quite confident that, in his own way, he’s trying to show this to his fellow members in many ways that perhaps we don’t even see. But one way that’s quite obvious and public is his candidacy.

I’m not trying to suggest the only or even most important reason he’s running is to change his church. But it surely can’t hurt, to show those who typically believe anything Republican is “bad”, that a man who is of their same race, of their same background, can and will win not only the Republican nomination but the Presidency in November.

My only point to you is that there are two ways of looking at this: Either Herman Cain is some kind of Manchurian Candidate from some southern Baptist Church, or he is a man with principle who not only loves his church but his country. Either is a “possibility” I suppose; I therefore choose to believe the latter. There is no reason not to ascribe such positivity to the man.

This all came from me just asking 1 simple question....why has he not broken away from his ALL black Church?

The responses I got from some was basically that the question was out of bounds.

And again as a dirty rotten sinner myself, saved by the Grace of the Lord Jesus Christ alone! I do not think it is too much to ask that all of us vote for the unborn, For Jesus/The Word of God to be welcomed in open society etc.

To vote against such things,certainly is to spit on Christ.

Now Cain as far as we know is on the right side of these issues! I am just asking the question, he says he is no longer with the plantation.

I am also skeptical of Perry and Bachmann for full disclosure. I asked the same question of Perry and I got the same angry responses that some have given me here.

Perry claims to weep for the unborn, yet as recently as 2008 he endorsed Rudy G for President, this same Perry missed the entire Reagan revolution.

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.