Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: Vermont Lt
Its called playing the hand you are dealt. No one forced her to be Governor. She knew the rules. If she were so strong, she could have dealt with it head on.

So, instead of staying on, running the state, and dealing with the issues head on, she bails out.

That's just it, don't you see? She couldn't run the state, because she and her staff were being overwhelmed with frivolous, nuisance lawsuits, each of which was purposely designed to stop her from doing her job, and to personally bankrupt her and her family.

What on earth would she have proven by continuing to stand there, essentially unarmed and without protection, taking bullet after bullet from her enemies?

Would you have rushed to her aid with your dollars and your voice, if she'd withered and fallen from those unceasing attacks? br> Would you have defended her honor as she collapsed from the sheer weight of the assault against her?
Would you have fought to see her re-instated if she'd been impeached for failure to do her job as Governor?

Sarah Palin ran for the office of Governor to help the people of her state. She didn't sign on to be thwarted from doing that job while tied up in courts and lawsuits, and she didn't sign on to allow her family to be crushed to death.

I'd be willing to bet that you never read her book, "Going Rogue". If you had, you would understand every detail of that episode in her life. Perhaps you'd understand it well enough to refrain from unfairly attacking her over her decision.

167 posted on 05/18/2011 6:25:40 PM PDT by Windflier (To anger a conservative, tell him a lie. To anger a liberal, tell him the truth.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 93 | View Replies ]


To: Windflier

No I would not have run to her defense.

But, based on her popularity and the dedication of her supporters I would have imagined should could have raised the cash.

On a secondary note, anyone putting themselves in a position where personal liability is possible should know enough (or have people around her that know enough) to move those assets into someone else’s name to avoid EXACTLY what you are writing about.

Those are the dirty little secrets of people in power. They have no “personal” wealth—at least none that can be attached. The people who write the laws know this. I imagine there was a Democratic lawyer somewhere laughing when he found out she had not protected herself.

I am not sure what I find more discomforting: The fact that she did not know how to do that, or the fact that she DID know, and figured she was above the risk. Or worse yet, was she aware and had she protected herself—but decided to bail assuming that the public would have no idea about the process and see her as a sympathetic character.

None of those options look good.


175 posted on 05/19/2011 7:01:46 AM PDT by Vermont Lt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 167 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson