Posted on 03/03/2011 8:29:20 PM PST by Bigtigermike
Former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin clarified remarks posted on Twitter this week in response to a Supreme Court ruling in favor of a church that demonstrates at military funerals, saying she was making a point about a double standard on free speech, not that the group shouldn’t have the right to protest.
Her quote was interpreted by many news outlets, including The Daily Caller, to mean that she disagreed with the Supreme Court’s ruling, although in a new statement exclusive to TheDC, Palin said she agreed with the ruling in favor of the church.
“Obviously my comment meant that when we’re told we can’t say ‘God bless you’ in graduation speeches or pray before a local football game but these wackos can invoke God’s name in their hate speech while picketing our military funerals, it shows ridiculous inconsistency,” Palin told TheDC. “I wasn’t calling for any limit on free speech, and it’s a shame some folks tried to twist my comment in that way. I was simply pointing out the irony of an often selective interpretation of free speech rights.”
(Excerpt) Read more at dailycaller.com ...
I’m encouraged by the fact that most of the posters on this thread are sensible and understood what Sarah was saying.
I’d guess it’s 80-20 and would be more except that Palin haters are a little ... unbalanced ... and will go to the grave iterating and re-iterating their points.
It’s time for you people to focus on the election. It’s coming up. We need to unify behind a conservative or we’ll end up with either Huckabee or Romney.
Think about it.
Unfortunately, you failed to mention that there IS an Establishment Clause in the Constitution, but you failed to define it or clarify it.
(Must be your superior intelligence, unable to convey the concept in “small words”.)
Maybe we need a GIF of Sarah Palin tap dancing.
Im not sure what you mean by Tweets getting us Obama in 2008, but I think Truth101A makes a valid point. For those concerned abou Palin always having to re-explain herself, think about all the times she has had to, and for what kind of comment. A Tweet. Tweets are what she has had to elaborate or explain further. Hardly an environment conducive to exacting language. Also, easily misinterpreted or mishandled by those who dislike her anyway. The posting style alone with all the @’s and gr8’s is already setting her, and everyone posting like that, up fir misunderstanding. Not to mention it’s not exactly Presidential. Which brings me to my only criticism of Palin at this point.
QUIT THE TWEETING. That is, if you’re really serious about (possibly) running for President. Someone downthread likened it to a bored teenager in study hall and, I’m sorry to say I agree with that characterization. For better or worse, that’s what Tweeting is likened to, especially if one posts with excessive use of substitutionary characters as she apparently does.
It simply doesn’t come across as Presidential, and clearly leads to problems such as this.
Love Sarah, but kinda agree on the tweeting. It’s a quick way to get an opinion out, but facebook is better and just as quick.
I’m kinda interested in who all the anti-palins on this thread are for as our candidate.
Pissant is all over Michele Bachman, but I am suspicious of this. He was accused of being anti-female and is countering that accusation by either being a Bachman fan or pretending to be.
There are only a few candidates who have a real chance. Two are Huckabee and Romney. Then about 8 or 9 borderline possibilities, none of whom seem to be to be viable.
Christie has a lot of negatives and besides, he says he’s not running.
There are a couple of males who are good conservatives but none who have a lot of charm or charisma (and if you think that’s not necessary - hah). Not only that, none of them but Christie seem to be able to state their positions in an exciting forceful manner.
So, I’m hoping for Palin, but all the Palin haters out there need to unite and find someone they can agree on and support him or her.
I would support a good conservative who seemed to have a chance, but who could it be???
Hey, I’m a fan of Palin’s too, but I think you’ve sacrificed logic for a favorable parsing.
It appears that some believe that there are supporters of Palin that view her in messianic terms, much like a large number of liberals did with Obama.
PDS can effect conservatives as well as RINOs and liberals.
That would be a good idea. Twittering just isn’t working out.
Yeah, because that worked so well for GW Bush. Uh huh.
BTW, you say she should keep quiet. I'm going to LSM you here: BigSkyFreeper says prominent female Presidential hopeful should have “kept quiet.” Should she only speak when spoken to? Does BigSkyFreeper want to go back to the days when women had no voice, couldn't vote, and were kept "barefoot and pregnant"? Is BigSkyFreeper a misogynist or does he just hate women candidates?
Now, will you follow your own advice and not respond? If so, I could just keep repeating this until it became accepted fact, with the questions morphing into statements justified by "BigSkyFreeper doesn't deny..." or the like. If not, I could harp on you for having to hog the limelight and say your problem is that you should "keep quiet." See how easy that is? THAT’s what they do...
You can't be serious.
Palin used the word "but". It's a coordinating conjunction. It was used correctly to describe a contrast between the current ruling and past rulings.
She is comparing this ruling to other rulings and she saying that they are inconsistent.
There is no other logical way to take all of the words that she used and come up with a different meaning. One would have to parse her statement and leave off both the conjunction and everything that follows it, to come up with any other meaning.
The parsing son, is being done by you.
And I don't care less if you are a Palin "fan" or not.
Myself, it’s the venue and the subject. She should not attampt to explain her opinion on a very important Supreme Court decision on Twitter. She should have posted a longer comment on her Facebook site, and pointed to it with her Tweet.
I am sure she won’t make that mistake again.
Exactly why though did you never object to freepers disparaging any other potential candidates? Why the lack of consistency?
And, btw....quitters do not get respect in my house...you may have a different standard.
Another throw away line.
Exactly why though did you never object to freepers disparaging any other potential candidates? Why the lack of consistency?
Actually I have often defended politicians I don't particuarly like against unfair charges.
I doubt you have.
And, btw....quitters do not get respect in my house...you may have a different standard.
People who are out front fighting against the destruction of our country get all the respect in the world in my house. That's my standard. Apparently, it's not yours.
Sorry but standing on the sidelines and throwing the occasional twitter-bomb doesn't cut it...not when she quit her last elected position...her last non-celebrity job.
You wrote; "Actually I have often defended politicians I don't particuarly like against unfair charges."
I do not believe you...if you have posts to prove me wrong then show them.
Yes, as a matter of fact, it is. That was in the trial court record and not disputed.
Which leads me to wonder what double standard Palin was referring to. Personally, I think prayer in school is fine, but to claim as she did that that denying prayer in schools somehow meant there was a "double standard" when viewed with this decision makes zero sense. The double standard would be not permitting prayer 1000 feet away from a church. Or school, I suppose.
Out front? Where? In Wisconsin...no. In Washington...no. On TV, FB and twitter and in highly paid speaking engagements...yep.
Yep, People out front fighting against the destruction of our country, on TV, on FB, on twitter, in newspaper op-eds and in speaking engagements get all the respect in the world from me and not from you.
About Wisconsin, If I was Palin, I certainly wouldn't go without an invite from Gov. Walker. Did Walker invite her? Did Palin turn him down? We of course have no idea.
---------------
Actually I have often defended politicians I don't particuarly like against unfair charges.
I do not believe you...if you have posts to prove me wrong then show them.
That's not the way to ask. Go find them yourself. Meanwhile your classless trashing of Palin on this thread is easy to document.
You never posted anything defending politicians other than palin...you know it...we all do.
You have now demonstrated that you are a liar, and a classless one at that.
One may disagree with her; however, calling her stupid is not a legitimate option...
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.