[presently no screen name]

Your attempt at comparing SARAH to Mitt is laughable! Please - you can't do any better than the Marxist Mitt - the one who Barry copied his idea of MittCare along with his 'Reagan Era is Over' mantra! Where is Mitt - having his paid buddies do quiet underhanded backstabbing as he steps forward with a smile to fool the uninformed.

When the media goes through his garbage, moves next door to him, trashes ever person in his family, tries to watch every dime he makes, investigate everything he has every done from childhood, hang on his every word, report one of his kids is instead his own kid's, JUST FOR STARTERS - then YOU might have a case in comparing him to Sarah. And add DAILY for two years!

GO SARAH!

[rob777]

"Your attempt at comparing SARAH to Mitt is laughable!"


There are a lot of differences between the two, I am not denying that. There is also one big similarity. Both have taken positions on key issues that should rule them out as a choice to lead conservatives. With Mitt, it is his health care plan. With Sarah it was her pushing publicly for the passage of the Law of the Sea Treaty in 2007 while she was still Governor of Alaska.

Both have done other things that are questionable in my mind, but the two issues mentioned above are deal killers in and of themselves. Mitt's shortcomings are well known and have been spelled out in great detail on this site. When considering who to back for the President, an issue like support for the Law of the Sea Treaty is a MAJOR consideration. That monstrosity presents an significant threat to our sovereignty and all serious conservatives have unequivocally rejected it. The fact that this issue is largely ignored when considering Sarah as the person to lead the conservative movement is a real mystery to me.