Posted on 07/12/2009 9:15:01 PM PDT by EternalVigilance
Mrs Palin is an amazing woman, and she has tremendous potential to become NOT the second coming of Reagan, but rather the first coming of Palin (every era needs its hero, and while Reagan was great, it may soon be time for Palin to come to the fore and lead the nation).
HOWEVER, I am troubled by what appears, to me at least, like some level of Palin worship has been going on here on FR. If not worship outright, then at the very LEAST the insinuation that Mrs Palin is infallible, she can do no wrong, and any one who does not recognize that fact is a Leftist aggitator. Where Mrs Palin makes a decision (e.g. resigning from her post), and before she even says why she did so people are already saying what a great master-stratagem that was (it probably is a terrific master-move from Palin that will ensure she garners the Big Seat come 2012, or it could simply be she wants to step down from the limelight and spend time with her family! I would personally rather wait and hear from Mrs Palin herself rather than people who probably have only seen her on TV, and read about her from other commentators).
Do I doubt that she is capable to be president ...yes, more than anyone I can think of right now. Do I doubt her integrity ...not one bit, and I admire someone who will look you square in the eye and say the darn truth for a change!
However, we are becoming like some of those people on DU who will swarm over anyone saying anything negative about Hugo Chavez. Where someone's personality eclipses other issues at hand.
I know we have a dearth of people who can be president (and win), and that makes Mrs Palin even greater for us because the other people are either too compromised (RINOs like McCain ...actually McCain is not a RINO ...he is a DUC - a democrat under cover ...and quacking all over), too emotionally-saitized (e.g. Bobby Jindal ...nice guy, true conservative, could stop a world war simply by talking the fighting forces to sleep), or apparently or actually hypocritical (e.g certain conservatives who preach the Bible but fly to Argentina for explicitly non-Bible purposes). With such a situation, Palin becomes even more important, and it is easy to understand why.
It is just that reading some threads on FR regarding Mrs Palin, and some threads of DUmmie land on Hugo Chavez, brings very close parallels that in some aspects are exactly the same, apart from the posters and their subject. Rather than overriding issues, it is instead more of the personality and the hope. While for Mrs Palin that may not necessarily be a bad thing - as I mentioned I think by 2012 she could be an amazing leader and president - it does induce myopia where all people see is Palin, and not other people who are still unknown as of now but could be even better come then. People have already corronated Palin, which is ironic considering how we were saying the same thing had happened to a certain person with the last name of Obama.
That myopia not only makes other potential candidates (and I am NOT talking about people like Huxy et al ...please!) invisible, but it also opens people up to disappointment! Think of Bobby Jindal ...he was not on my radar until a time came when every other fifth thread was about him, and how he is this and that. Well, he seems to be a true conservative, and his heritage would have tapped people who may have thought Conservatism is for old white people. Then he spoke on TV, and I immediately knew that he would never be able to win a debate, even at the VP level. Soon after that his movement on FR fizzled up.
Anyways, I like Mrs Palin, but I think that has to be a decision that each Conservative makes for him/herself, and that is based on a critical and careful assessment of what the Party needs in terms of direction and leadership, what the Country needs in terms of defense and economy and a dozen other issues, whether the person in question can deliver on that and a whole other issues, and deliver while receiving hellish amounts of attack from all sides (I will always respect President and Mr Bush for his resilience in what must have been quite hard for him ...I was not always with him from an economic point of view, and some of this actions were honestly Liberal, but he was a strong president on defence, and a man of such integrity in the face of withering fire that my respect for him on that front couldn't be higher ...Mrs Palin NEEDS to be able to withstand the same), and at the same time keeping an eye out for any other candidate, even if none is apparent now, who may be able to deliver in a better way.
I have the highest hopes for Mrs Palin, and if what she did was a master-stratagem then she will be, as mentioned, the first coming of Palin rather than the second of Reagan. She would be head to head with Mr Reagan and Mrs Thatcher ...easily. Even though I cannot vote (not a citizen) I feel that she would be an amazing candidate, and she is a breath of air in a party, and a country, that seriously needs to get its second wind. However, there has been a spot of Hugo Chaveism going on with regards to support for her, and while she may be all she is said to be and a can of fried beans, it does expose one to risk and myopia. If she is as great as I think she may be, then she will rise up to the top anyways.
Flame away.
I note that none of my adversaries have yet spelled out which other unalienable rights besides the right to live that they are willing to apply their illogic to.
Discernment is a strange thing, but then again you wouldn’t know, since you don’t seem to discern anything except a philosophy that is very similar to Islamo-fascism.
I meant 'no, and I think she's more capable than anyone I can think of right now.'
You. like them, twist the Constitution to say waht you wish it said.
Roe did not say the baby wasn’t a person. The Court said they had no scientific evidence telling them when life started. The Court specifically said that if there were ever scientific evidence showing THE STATES had a compelling interest in writing laws to protect that life.
You twist what the Court said like you twist what the Constitution says. That is typical of statists.
But you never answered the question. Why should a pre-born baby have special protections a one-hour-old baby doesn’t have or a twenty-year-old doesn’t have?
Since when do Islamo-fascists advocate the self-evident truth “that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men...”?
I think you are very much like Obama.
Your public goal is to glorify Keyes but your personal goal is to destroy conservatives and FR.
Well, I am now pretty certain to never consider Keyes for anything so part of your goal is accomplished.
Wow.
I already posted the portion of Roe that clearly declared the child in the womb not to be a person and therefore not protected by the Fourteenth Amendment. Why do you keep ignoring this clear fact?
As you your last point, I have no idea where you got such a notion.
I'm advocating the principles of FR, as stated in detail by Jim Robinson more times than I can count. How can that possibly destroy it?
Answer: When they take it to the level of “Every judge, lawmaker, etc. must recognize these rights”, despite the fact that God’s input of free will makes it impossible for every judge and lawmaker to do so.
What you get into is similar to Islamo-fascism.
Now you’re just getting silly.
Our elected officials are more than capable of keeping their oaths. They simply don’t want to.
Actually, you just made my point for me. Our elected officials do not keep their oaths. And as long as there is free will in the world, there will be lawmakers who will not keep their oaths.
It is a fact of life that you cannot deny, and have no right to deny. And which will not be rectified until the day when Christ returns, whenever that may be.
Tell your mentor that using FrontPage as a web design tool is also a bad policy. One of the worst designs I have seen in a long time. “Let’s pick coral anenome as a design!?!” “Gosh, Dr Keyes, sounds good to me!?!?”
Revere the word acolyte. It should be a badge of honor.
But first, I'll leave you with these timeless words:
"I have said that the Declaration of Independence is the RINGBOLT to the chain of your nation's destiny; so, indeed, I regard it. The principles contained in that instrument are saving principles. Stand by those principles, be true to them on all occasions, in. all places, against all foes, and at whatever cost." - Frederick Douglass
I take it back! It is not a FrontPage design but a blogspot design!!!! FrontPage is a little more professional so my apologies to the FP people out there.
Nice site Dr keyes. Looks a lot like your analysis.
It’s funny when people call many who talk about Governor Palin as the future of the conservative movement “cultists”.
Certainly, there are some who take their devotion a bit far and rightfully earn the title, but for the majority, they just like what she says and has not found anyone in the last few years to articulate it. They effectively “get it”.
The people favor her because she makes sense. She doesn’t beat God into people, she doesn’t force her opinions on others. People like that.
Likewise, there are those who follow Ambassador Keyes. Some are people who like what he has to say, believes he has the right idea for what is to come. That’s all well and good.
However, to put the Ambassador as a paragon of holiness and the only right person on the face of the planet, such as what the chairman of the America’s Independent Party has attempted to do tonight, is cult-like.
Both are believers. And both of them have different roles to play. Favor, however, goes to the one who is able to articulate things simply for the people, who desire something new.
Governor Palin does that. Ambassador Keyes and his lap-dog, don’t.
I got it from you. You say you want a federal law against killing a pre-born baby but never said you want one against killing anyone else.
It would appear Dr. Keyes has a point. While kicking the decision on abortion back to the States may be a start, thus breaking the grip of Roe v. Wade, it would only stop the slaughter in some venues. That is far from securing the unalienable Right to Life of which the Founders spoke.
I would love to see the voting/signing records of the candidates posted before the election without noting the name, gender, race, or so much as party of the candidates, just how they have stood on the issues, or in the case of those who have no track record, how they claim to stand.
Such might enable Americans to make a better decision in the voting booth.
Keyes is the reparation man isn’t he? He has become a parody of ‘the moral man’, very similar to Huckabee!
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.