Skip to comments.Sarah Palin Slips into Self-Parody
Posted on 01/26/2015 6:22:08 PM PST by MinnesotaLibertarian
click here to read article
Sarah might be planning a surprise by being ditzy now in the heats and turning dead serious as voters start paying more attention. If she doesn’t then I’ll give up on her.
Pretty much everyone she backed was elected. Suppose she backs herself, it could get interesting as these FReepers hide under their desks with their hands on their heads.
Pray America is waking
VP influence? Yes. With the base. Winning is another matter, isnt it?
If none, say none.
What everyone forgets is that the Palin treatment has worked on every GOP candidate they've used their tactics on, it's what the left does and will do until enough people find a way to beat these tyrants.
In that sense, every member that has an (R) behind there name is unelectable.
Actually I’m leaning more towards Ted Cruz or Scott Walker, but I’m keeping an open mind at this point. What I am quite confident of is that we have an ample supply of candidates who are much more qualified than Sarah Palin.
Unlike Sarah Palin, I am confident Ted Cruz can take the heat and remain coherent while doing so.
Actually, your excerpts make no point whatever rather than the imagination of the writer.
Today has been a huge frenzy over Palin.
It has been hysterical and more like a witch hunt scapegoating than anything I can remember.
Her speech was fine. It’s was not incoherent or disjointed.
It was perhaps a bit rushed or awkward.
But the hysteria and frenzy is not merited at all.
All it took for Romney to fold was a Candy Crowley “Boo”.
One could say the same thing about the National Review.
Hee hee ;-)
If nothing else we know were you get your news
The National Review is an elitist, snobby magazine that doesn’t really like anyone who is not from the Northeast. People from other areas of the country just don’t stand a chance with them, and Republicans from the Northeast cannot get elected. Sigh!
I have seem many, many articles attacking Sarah’s speech, but I don’t understand why she is being singled out. This has happened again, and again, and again. Sarah gives a speech some people don’t like, so she shouldn’t be president. Hillary let people die. She also treats the little guy and gal as if they were dirt. But she’s a Democrat, so it’s okay.
“Consider, if you will, what happens to a person who suggests that Sarah Palin is anything other than saintly. Right off the bat, they are accused of disliking America or Alaska or conservatives or mothers or the working class or even women in general and then they are informed that their hatred is showing.”
And what does this have to do with whether she made a good speech or not?
These critics are the incoherent ones.
Actually is also what GOPe does.
We will get an opportunity to see what Cruz is make of when the MSM and GOPe come after his family.
I’ve never seen York on tv.
Okay, you both busted out with the exact same talking point; that I am allegedly using an MSM talking point. What is your response then? Why is this not a problem?
The following is an excerpt from a 10/22/14 “piece” that the PALIN DESPISER Charles Cooke penned:
“As should now be clear to all who follow my work, I do not like Sarah Palin. I never have. I didnt like her when she was chosen as John McCains vice-presidential nominee, I didnt like her when she became an ersatz television star and part-time political rabble-rouser, and I dont like her now, in the waning days of her fame. Her speech to the National Rifle Association in 2013 was a rambling, self-parodic disaster, all sentiment and no substance; and her offering to the following years convention was somehow even worse an indulgent, alienating piece of ostensibly impromptu performance art, composed of precisely the sort of us-vs.-them gang signals and unsubstantiated indignation that serve only to leave neutral observers with the impression that conservatism has nothing to offer them....”
And here’s a link to THAT article:
Since that 10/22/14 piece, Mr. Cooke’s envy and hatred of Sarah Palin has exponentially increased and his anti-Palin JIHAD continues.
I’M DISAPPOINTED EVERYTIME I SEE A FReeper JOIN IN AN ANTI-PALIN OR AN ANTI-TED CRUZ JIHAD. It’s sad to say but I’m frequently disappointed.
IMHO Charles C. W. Cooke couldn’t fill Sarah Palin’s hi-heels, although I’m sure he has tried repeatedly.
It has nothing to do with her policies - it has do with how she conducts herself. I agree entirely that she was not treated fairly by the media in 2008, but she has done nothing but play into the image they've created for her ever since. Furthermore, quitting her term as Governor halfway through is a major red flag,That's a perfect litany of leftist talking points, and now you're trying to tell us you don't have a problem with her per se?
Sorry, you seem to fit perfectly into at least one of Breitbart's categories.
“Because the stuff Sarah gets pilloried for is stuff that doesn’t matter to any thinking individual, or shouldn’t”
The reactions she gets is scary because it is hysterical mob mentality psychology.
And it’s scary because it is from left and right, from people who have taken leave of their senses or objectivity, who ostensibly are professional and should know better.
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.