Posted on 01/28/2014 12:10:14 PM PST by Marcus
Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz. was recently censored by Arizona Republicans for being too much of a RINO and a generally irascible fellow. Sarah Palin has taken to her Facebook page to rally to the venerable war hero's defense.
(Excerpt) Read more at voices.yahoo.com ...
You can only post that because Obama and McCain are keeping us safe, just like GWB and Hillary did.
So what if you lost a few freedoms? No-one has flown a airliner into your building or house. They take the fight to the terrorists so we don't have to fight here.
Civil liberties are for terrorists. If you are not a terrorist then you are safe without them.
Give John McCain a salute as Sarah told you to do, while you still can. DADADA
And here I thought my God was the one that kept me safe — even when I was in Iraq.
Good to know I was wrong and it's really small and fallible people that are holding my safety in their hands. [/sarcasm]
So what if you lost a few freedoms? No-one has flown a airliner into your building or house. They take the fight to the terrorists so we don't have to fight here.
I don't know about you, but I spent 9 years in the army [national guard] and was deployed ostensibly to defend the Constitution of the United States… which is, apparently, not worth the paper it was written on given how quickly you roll over and surrender the liberties that cost thousands of lives to secure.
Civil liberties are for terrorists. If you are not a terrorist then you are safe without them.
Only an idiot would say this.
Without civil rights any petty official can seize your land, your wealth, and take your life... without even giving you a defense.
Why the 5th Amendment is Great.
Give John McCain a salute as Sarah told you to do, while you still can.
She is not my commander, nor my governor. Neither is he.
Since I got out, I salute whom I will.
Since you have most likely never lived in a Muslim country, and since I grew up in a neighborhood surrounded by Muslims, I can tell you that it is impossible to establish a “democracy” in countries where Muslims are the overwhelming majority. Devout Muslims only believe in law proscribed in Koran, which is also known as Sharia.
Look at Pakistan. They have tried democracy several times, only to be replaced by something else. Iraq is disintegrating right in front of our eyes. All that blood and treasure spent for what? Afghanistan is even worse.
In order for democracy to succeed, the Muslims have to reform internally first. Something like what happened in Turkey. Learn from Israel who knows lot more about Muslims than us. They never try to convert any Muslim neighbor to democracy.
The only thing McCain wants to do is bomb every nation he can.
I mis-typed my post, I see. I meant that I would not remove my support from her in spite of her comments about McCain.
Its cool I understood :)
Well, then your whole point is incorrect.
Palin didn't claim that McCain fights big-spending colleagues. She said he fights big-spending colleagues who don't prioritize for our military's needs. That is true.
Likewise, Palin didn't say that McCain fights against Obama. She said that McCain fights to remind Obama that a strong defense is the government's first priority, that McCain has carried part of our message of opposition to Obama, and that McCain has been steadfast in demanding the truth about the Benghazi cover-up. All of which are true.
Palin summed up her entire point with the following sentence.
Despite our differences on some other issues, there is no questioning Senator McCain's dedication to national security in spite of the White House's agenda.You applied your own context to Palin's statements by turning them into very broad generalizations, which she never implied, and then said that she made blatantly false claims. In my opinion, you made the false claims not Palin. That said, I make no claims or assumptions about your intentions.
Unless you're spending money that you don't have; in which case it's just true it's stupid.
You applied your own context to Palin's statements by turning them into very broad generalizations, which she never implied, and then said that she made blatantly false claims. In my opinion, you made the false claims not Palin. That said, I make no claims or assumptions about your intentions.
I've said, essentially, that her striving to make McCain the "good guy" (in what and how she said it) that she is essentially placing herself in their camp. Like cops who do not act to being "bad cops" to justice aren't good cops, but bad cops because they are allowing the evil to continue. — It would be one thing if she didn't comment, or if she found one thing to praise that wasn't bull (and McCain calling for truth is bull, just like Issa and investigating
Fast & Furious) I could accept that. But to so blatantly speak glowingly of this enemy-of-liberty is not something that should be ignored, IMO.
Maybe you're right and I'm reading too much into it. Or maybe she's become used to having a fan-base and is trying to do what the GOP tried with Romney: take the "conservative vote" for granted and pick up "moderate" and "liberal" votes.
I don’t think she spoke glowingly about McCain. Far from it, IMHO. But as I said earlier, your mileage may vary.
Palin’s support is a bit late. Real meaningful support came from George Soros, when his NGO paid for a good part of McCain’s legal expenses, defending him from Democrat voters who charged him with election fraud, claiming that McCain was not a Natural Born Citizen. Along that line Barack and his campaign co-chair, Clare McCaskill really went to bat for McCain in February 2008 when they sponsored Senate Bill 2678, the “Children of Military Families Natural Born Citizen Act.” SB 2678 failed to pass.
Many of you can’t believe McCain’s parent’s citizenship and military assignment on non-sovereign territory, the Canal Zone in 1936, excluded him from natural born citizenship, but Barack, Clinton, Leahy, Menendez, McCaskill, etc, clearly disagree, and supported the bill, which they wouldn’t have done if there was settled law.
Obama, Leahy, all Democrat and all Republican senators did what they could, cobbling together a follow-on bill to SB 2678 in April 2008, Senate Resolution 511, the “Senator John McCain Natural Born Citizen Resolution”. Resolutions, of course, don’t make law, but they all agreed, in effect, that whatever the law, McCain was deserving of a run for the presidency, if only he were eligible. Former Judge Michael Chertoff asserted that because he was born to two citizen parents, McCain was eligible, ignoring the dozen or so Supreme Court Cases also requiring being born on US soil.
A rationale was made that being born on our soil was not necessary because of a 1790 Citizenship Act, this claim by Obama’s Constitutional Law professor, Larry Tribe (whose admitted plagiarism Elena Kagan covered for a couple of years earlier). Tribe and Olson deployed a little sophistry, but it had no legal relevance, even if it had been true - it wasn’t since the 1790 Citizenship Act Tribe cited was completely rescinded in 1795, and was the last time Congress ever mentioned natural born citizenship, constitutionally limited as Congress is by Article 1 Section 8, to creating an Uniform Rule for NATURALIZATION.
Without John McCain’s cover, Barack would have had his eligibility challenged by more than only Georgia Congressman Nathan Deal. Deal’s open letter asking for confirmation of Obama’s eligibility was answered by a letter from the Congressional Ethics Committee informing him of an IRS investigation of his tax returns, a clear promise of impending bankruptcy. Deal resigned Congress and became governor of Georgia.
Had any one of the eight Article II Section 1 amendment attempts between 2000 and 2007 passed, both Obama and McCain would have been eligible. Because of McCain, both major parties have chosen to ignore the Constitution, which intentionally does not itself contain definitions of any term save one, and that, a restriction on “Treason”, a term used too liberally by the Crown.
They all know, but will all cover their perfidy, given the effectiveness of the “birther” campaign, and the promise of retribution from the militant progressives surrounding the Obama administration. The birther was probably launched by Democrat operative and Hillary campaign official, Phillip Berg, to cover the real issue. Berg claimed proof of a Kenyan birth certificate, which, of course, never materialized. The certificate was a distraction, just as Chester Arthur employed a journalist to write a book claiming Arthur was foreign born: Arthur was born in Vermont, but his father was not a citizen. Arthur created the smokescreen, just as Obama’s supporters have. No one ever questioned the citizenship of Arthur’s father, which made Arthur ineligible had it been revealed.
Palin’s Christian goodness may have inspired her kindness to McCain, but Democrats at the top deserve most of the credit for McCain’s last opportunity at immortality. Without Democrats, the failure of two Conyers, one Frank and one Menendez natural born citizen amendment, made McCain the political buffer allowing Obama to run unchallenged, even while he honestly told us all he was a naturalized, and not a natural-born citizen. Lest there be any doubt about Republican complicity, had Rohrabacher, Nickles, or Orin Hatch’s amendment attempts, to make Schwarzenegger eligible succeeded. both Obama and McCain would have been eligible. But no amendment got out of congress, confirming two points: both parties understand the Constitutional requirement from the clear exposition in many Supreme Court Cases, and by the author of the 14th Amendment, John Bingham, including the precedent-making Minor v. Happersett, and the relevant Wong Kim Ark, in which Minor was cited, and native-born Wong Kim was made a citizen, naturalized at birth, but not natural-born. Both parties participated in suppressing the constitution. This is why we need Tea Parties.
I would still love to see Palin, and or Bachmann in most any leadership position, or Allen West, or Suzanna Martinez, or Mike Lee, or Rand Paul, or Ted Cruz if we can make him eligible. It is past time that the bill, halfheartedly sponsored by Obama and McCaskill, be turned into an amendment to make the foreign-born children of military citizens natural born. Our framers had good reason to require that our most powerful citizen, our president, have been raised by parents of undoubted allegiance to our republic. We are seeing the wisdom of their prescience. But citizens protecting our nation are likely to have children who are born into respect for nation, though some constraints must be considered for where the foreign-born children are raised. Today, foreign born children are considered natural born if born in an Embassy, or on other territory over which the US has sovereignty. The Canal Zone was made sovereign territory by Congress in 1937, the year after McCain was born. It was unfortunate, but is the law.
Whatever
I’ve moved on....
Ted Cruz is a far better candidate
There are always rumors when a man’s father is CINCPAC.
Wrong. The article here is not the first. Palin explained her posts elsewhere.http://www.mediaite.com/online/palin-defends-mccain-from-censure-undermining-efforts-to-uncover-the-obama-agenda/
You make me giggle.
That was the state of mind of the Republicans during the GWBush years, as was the rest of that comment.
The contrary and more recent liberty themes were a reaction to Obama becoming POTUS.
Not free, Republicans like Bush and Mccain were keeping us alive we were lectured over and over.
Since you mention sarcasm, you may wanna get your sarcasm detector fixed.
I prefer the word satire, sometimes its more fun and effective to do that than just repeating what others are posting.
I got a kick out of playing Mccain neocon and reading his responses.
I still recall Mark Levin telling a caller who was critical of Bush that if he wasn't a terrorist he had nothing to worry about, regarding indefinite detentions of US citizens with no court review.
That was the GOP mindset of ~ 2007.
Neither can his fellow vets. He completely betrayed Viet Nam MIA's and their families. I'm absolutely convinced he's a traitor.
“...The real reason, ... is due to the one great decision the long term senator made, which was to select the then governor of Alaska to be his vice presidential running mate in 2008. Almost every other part of the McCain campaign, including its treatment of its rock star running mate, was a disaster. But the elevation of Palin to national prominence has had long lasting effects on American politics. Some of those effects have not been to the senator’s liking, such as the election of Ted Cruz to the senate thanks, in part, to Palin’s efforts....”
Bingo, like I said... She feels like she owes him some allegiance for getting her to “The Big Show”.
Yes, most of us who served in that war feel he could have done more for our MIA families. Yet,we who served in that war, had US military pals MIA plus INDIG MIA and we had many others who were shot up who felt McCain was better then Obama. This divide and conquer is liberal politics plus Saul A. No Dem should be reelected with Obamacare. Some will be-with the class warfare politics. SAD.
Good gawd....I hope that was satire.
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.