Posted on 02/15/2011 6:28:34 PM PST by 2ndDivisionVet
>>In 2008, I supported the ticket of Ralph Nader and Matt Gonzalez.<<
I stopped reading at that point.
Whoever this wienie is, he/she had only 1 or 2 brain cells and isn’t worth tracking.
He says he’s from Alaska, but writes like he lives in the state of confusion.
What would be the motivation of a very leftie enviro to ‘reason’ with Sarah?
It certainly is not to get the world to see the real Sarah.
I think he concocted most of his prescient comments to add credibility to his appeal.
What part of this open letter is open because Vickery wants to associate his name with hers? Seems to me his stated interests would have been better served with a phone call or actual letter, if not a face to face meeting to talk to her about what he writes here.
Well I read the whole thing. He supported her but not enough to vote for her and whatshisname and he’s wanting the same ole Sarah back because from his point of view she’s changed for the worse.
My thought is how could she not change after all that has happened?
I thought that was a very nice very fair and good article.
What’s the date for that?
>>Well I read the whole thing. He supported her but not enough to vote for her and whatshisname and he’s wanting the same ole Sarah back because from his point of view she’s changed for the worse.<<
Well, thanks for doing the digging — and thanks for the summary.
http://www.countercurrents.org/vickrey150211.htm
The article was dated today feb 15.
There was only one paragraph that was at all bad, and it blames someone else, an easily fixed problem.
More attacks like that.
“I’m a crazy leftist, and even I love you. We don’t agree, because I’m a crazy leftist, but you’ll be a great president. Fire Bill Kristol and the neocons that you’ve surrounded yourself with, and you’ll be right back to conservative perfect again.”
Yes, I agree its fixable.
In Gregory’s mind, he is a very important person and his opinion matters a lot.
This is a positive letter for Sarah. This fellow is an obvious leftie and greenie. He had no common positions with Gov. Palin, yet was allowed to interact and he developed an admiration for her. It wasn’t strong enough that he would vote for her, too far to the left for that, but he had confidence in who she was and knew that she would be herself. She has the ability, as Reagan did, to make her opponents like her and admire her, and work with her in places where they can.
He seems to be pleading for her to dispel the myths and falsehoods and be herself again. This tells us that there is a switch about to be turned on when Sarah hits the campaign trail and starts taking her message directly to voters. Maybe something we haven’t seen during the tightly scripted McCain campaign, or in stump speeches.
Vickery has done what many other Alaskans haven’t...offer a true picture of how Gov. Palin governed. Democrat office holders have probably been sworn to silence.
Sure, the condition is caused by external factors, remove the external factors, and the condition goes away.
That’s not even an attack.
“inner circle of advisors”
“Misguided counsel, the parade of Johnny’s-come-lately, and cronyism” or, “other people not you sarah, other people not you sarah, and other people not you sarah”
The only intrinsic factor could be ego.
Fortune (not her doing), fame (not her doing), limelight (not her doing), soundbite (not sure what this means, but it could mean the tendency of the media - not her doing - to rely on soundbite), ego (that’s it, that the only personal criticism) and inner circle of advisors. The only things that are really fixable are “ego” and “inner circle of advisors”. And note that they aren’t weighted. “inner circle of advisors” could be 99% of the problem.
Watch the ego, fire your inner circle of advisors. And get well soon. Because I think you’re great even though I’m a crazy leftist. That’s the message of the article. Very positive article.
Fortune, fame and limelight not her doing? Who are you trying to kid? Every bit of it is her choice.
“Some combination of fortune, fame, limelight, soundbite, ego, and inner circle of advisers has corrupted you and your approach to the point where your effective reality is no better - and in some cases, worse - than the shanty Republican you replaced (Murkowski) and the inept Democrat (Knowles) you demolished back home in Alaska more than four years ago. Misguided counsel, the parade of Johnny’s-come-lately, and cronyism have reduced you to a caricature of your character, and undermined your abilities (yes, I said abilities) to change the world for the better, and I’d like to understand why, and what you are going to do about it.”
Yes, all fixable but I have to wonder if he hasn’t bought into some of the media lies and therefore thinks she has changed when she really hasn’t.
Fortune is chance, not wealth in this case.
She didn’t run for the VP nomination. It was just there, out of the blue.
Fame, same thing, without the VP nomination, no fame,
Limelight, same thing.
Taking the VP nomination is not seeking good fortune, fame and the limelight. It’s doing what’s best for your country, for your party, however you want to say it.
And fortune fame and the limelight were put there by John McCain in the summer of 2008 and they’ve never gone away. And there was nothing that Palin could do to make the fame and the limelight just go away entirely. She would always have healthy amounts of both, no matter what she did.
She could minimize them, but they’re going to be there no matter what. So, if you have to have them, more would be better, perhaps?
To be fair, I think the book and tv show were her doing. I still like her, I just wish she wouldn't be evasive on some of the questions. If you support scamnesty, say it. I'm not convinced that she will run, so it really won't matter. jmo
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.