Posted on 11/06/2008 7:01:49 AM PST by ODDITHER
Good post.
IMHO, she handled herself 100% better than the Biden Gaffe.
As for BHO, maybe I'll see him at a Nittaly Lions Game here in Pa.
“The one thing that stuck out in my mind is that at one point the McCain staff went to her hotel room and she came out in just a towel (or a bathrobe?) and they complained about that!??!?!
Who would complain about that???? and why couldnt I get a job on the McCain staff???”
I’ve been asking this since last night. If any man on the staff complained about that they are soooo a Democrat.
I called. Told them to shut this crap down or kiss my money goodbye. It’ll go to Sarah’s campaign from now on.
Gal sounded like she could have cared less.
So, Carl Cameron of Fox News interviewed Democrats to get the story about Sarah coming out of the bathroom in a towel.
How would they know?
The only people in the room were Sarah Palin, Todd Palin, Steve Schmidt and Mark Salter.
Come on. Schmidt and Salter are trying to stick it to Palin for their laughable campaign.
His campaign was a joke, allright. He blew his last chance when he supported the bail out and never "named names" of the corrupt pols - mostly dims, of course - who brought on this disaster.
Choosing Palin was the one bright spot in his campaign, but it was so against his nature that he couldn't stand himself for doing it. Hence, the trashing of Palin by his staff.
We are about to see a fight for control of the Pubbies, and the first thing should be pushing McCain aside and TRASHING HIM the first time he takes sides with the dims on a big issue-- which shouldn't take too long.
Palin didn't even get the Roe question right. She was asked, "why do you think Roe was a bad decision". She answers that she thinks it should be left to the states, in that sense, she says, she's a federalist. But she never mentions why.
The reason Roe is a bad decision, the reason it is a state issue, is because the Constitution does not give the fed gubmint jurisdiction on the question. She treats it as a matter of preference, rather than as a matter of ConLaw.
She fails to explain to America why Roe was extra-constitutional. She never even mentions the Constitution. She just says "states should have more say." But WHY SARAH??? Because you think it's a good idea? That's not how it works. States should have more say because THAT'S WHAT OUR CONSTITUTION REQUIRES!
You start with the law. Then, explain why we're better off following it. Mention that in our system we have 50 laboratories of democracy,where most issues are ironed out. The feds should stick to the constitution and deal only with those tasks delegated to it. Close by pointing out that it makes no sense to let 9 unelected lawyers vote for us on the most important issues we face. It's bad for the country, and it's not Constitutional.
Then she goes on to tout her pro-life views, as if that has ANYTHING to do with why Roe was wrong. Epic failure. PWNED by Katie Couric, and she's our new Reagan? I sure hope not.
THEN she is asked to name a decision she disagrees with, and does her best Tina Fey impression. "Mmmmmmm." Lip smack. "Well....let's see...." (stalling to think of some angus grade bs). Then she goes into a complete BS fudge answer.
Sorry. I know my timing is bad bringing all this up now. But it's simply the truth. Watch it for yourself. And honestly tell me she didn't completely fail.
“Remember the name Steve Schmidt”
Thanks for that info. I’ll be emailing this to my conservative friend list. Makes one wonder if Mac’s lousy campaign wasn’t intentional.
Sarah needs to go around the country and tell her story in her own way.
It could be Democrats, it could be connected McCain campaign staffers, it could be rougue McCain staffers, it could be all made up.
Not one frickin' named source has been given.
Are you getting all of this?? (I doubt it)
Which says a lot about our recent crop. McCain winning the nod says even more about it. As for cherry-picking, that's simply BS. The Constitution has to be the central fundamental issue or else we're screwed. And the SCOTUS is of the utmost importance in that regard. If you can't effectively speak about it, with the ability to persuade average numnuts Americans, then you don't deserve the gig.
Inside-the-Beltway Republicans see government as an industry. The rest of us see government as a minor player in our lives.
Count me (and Sarah Palin, apparently) among the latter group.
Get a clue.
The whole damn thing is made up.
Why do you believe any of it? Hmmmmm?
I wish I could agree with you, but I do not. I just never felt confident that she was up to speed on National issues.
For example, If Rush appears on a Drive-Bye show, I expect them to come at him guns blazing. I always feel a smile coming on because I KNOW he is going to knock it out of the park and make the conservative case crystal clear to anyone watching.
This kind of “leadership” is what I feel she lacks.
And I don't seek to destroy Palin. But she hasn't sold me yet. Are you sure she's the best person to articulate conservatism? I'd like to think that when asked to name just one SCOTUS decision she disagreed with, she might have come up with SOMETHING. I didn't even go to college, and I could have named a few. How about Kelo? I think that the criticism of her is obviously over the top, but not without its grain of truth.
I think we should be very careful and very picky looking for our next leader? Why must we all buy in to Sarah now? Do you buy the first car you test drive?
Here's a sensible counter-proposal. Let's accept Sarah as an applicant for the job. Done. No more discussion needed on the subject of Sarah. She's a prospect.
NOW, let's go find two or three more, with the goal being to find someone so outstanding, we might even like them MORE than Sarah. Let's find two or three that we think could ALL do a great job, and then watch them compete with each other for our support. Aren't we supposed to stand for competition as a positive force? Then how about applying it to this task?
Makes perfect sense to me.
How about you advocate FOR someone, rather than getting in the way?
If you have a favorite candidate, speak up.
Otherwise, you’re just being a termite.
I do see your point. I always felt that this was because she was so afraid to say something that the McCain campaign had not given her permission to say. That she was limited to certain topics she was allowed to discuss and had been instructed what to say on those topics and to avoid other topics as much as possible. The result was a nervous and uncomfortable Sarah afraid to articulate anything. She wasn’t allowed to just be Sarah Palin.
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.