Replies

One good thing about Sarah in the US Senate in 2010 would be that she does attract the media and would be able to get the message out that the Democratic controlled Congress has so far run up a multi-trillion dollar deficit since Jan 2007.

We need to get that message out now! In their first budget cycle of 2008 the Democrats ran up a $455 billion dollar deficit and for 2009 it is looking to be at least a $1 trillion dollar deficit. That's more than the Republicans ran up when they were in control, yet it isn't making the news!

The Houses of Representatives by decree of the US Constitution controls all money appropriations.

Sarah doesn’t need to be in the Senate to promote her agenda. It is the MSM’s wishful thinking to get her out of her comfort zone and “castrate” her along with other 99 Washington politicians. In the Senate she will be voting yes, no or present. Sometimes it is hard to take a position. It will be easier for MSM to smear her with her Senate record. I can not see her cope with the everyday grind of the Senate. On the other hand, she can do some wonderful things in Alaska like energy independence and show people how her conservative views are put into practice directly. Freepers, please don’t fall for the propaganda like this from MSM to advise her go to the Senate. Reagan never went to Senate and see what happened to him. Once, she gets into the Senate, the liberals will slowly work to take her freshness and luster away and project her as another corrupt politician. She is already a rock-star. Just leave her alone and she will be just fine.