Palin supports McCain '100 percent' [Palin pushes back at TMZ 'disprespect' meme]

Politico ^ | Dec. 16, 2009 | Mike Allen

[Al B.]

Declaring that she “was honored and proud to run with him,” former Alaska governor Sarah Palin pushed back hard Wednesday against a report that she had disrespected Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) by blacking out his name on a sun visor she wore on vacation.

The website TMZ accused Palin of “a frontal attack on Sen. John McCain” during a Hawaii vacation this week: “Sarah chose to wear a visor from her campaign -- a visor that was emblazoned with the former presidential candidate's name ... that is, until Palin redacted McCain's name with a black marker.”

But Palin said in a statement to POLITICO that she was just trying to “be incognito” -- to go unrecognized and shield her children and husband, Todd, from paparazzi.

The hotel where she was staying had to chase away five photographers, a friend said.

Palin said in the statement to POLITICO: “I am so sorry if people took this silly incident the wrong way. I adore John McCain, support him 100 percent and will do everything I can to support his reelection. As everyone knows, I was honored and proud to run with him. And Todd and I were with him in D.C. just a week ago. So much for trying to be incognito."

The Palins were taking a break from a three-and-a-half-week book tour for her million-copy-selling memoir, “Going Rogue: An American Life.” Palin has signed more than 59,000 books -- an average of 1,750 per stop -- and has traveled more than 19,000 miles by plane and bus. She has spent 115 hours -- or 4.8 days -- signing books in 33 cities in 25 states. Her stops have included five military bases.

[onyx]

Thank you. I’ll wait until after the US senate adjourns to wish you a Merry Christmas. I can’t even think about Christmas while Reid and cohorts are in session.

[Lakeshark]

However, I (among others) was able to predict the failure months before it happened.

What failure? Oh you mean the failure to realize just how bad Bambi and the dems really are?

That they would outspend the eeeeeevil Republlicans 8 year spending binge in two weeks?

That they would virtually take over the government with their czars and their appointments?

That they would try to destroy our military in so many different ways?

That they would try to control so much in our business we would become de facto socialists?

That they would be within one vote of taking over our entire health care system, one that will be virtually irrevocable?

That they would do civilian trials in NYC of our biggest terrorists?

That they would try to ram the unions down everyone's throats?

That they would by fiat make co2 regulations on our industry, and ruin our economy?

*Gasping for breathe*

Almost anyone but you 1%ers knew this stuff, and could expand on this list a lot.

You are all dumb and stoopid as stumps. Enjoy your 1%, and keep it up, we'll be sure to have that list rammed down our throats forever and you'll just get angrier at everyone but the ones who did it, pissing and moaning that Sarah or anyone isn't perfect.

/rant

[DoughtyOne]

It sounds like she has a good logical mind.  It also seems she can soak up information readily.  And it looks like she was impressive even years ago.

That's good.  It still didn't prevent her form coming off looking somewhat like a deer in the headlights during the Couric interview.  That's not to say that the McCain team didn't submarine her or Couric didn't play games intended to make her look bad.  It's still something you can't allow to take place.

I don't think the McCain team fully appreciated Palin.  I believe their utilization of her was faulty, and they put her in situations she shouldn't have been put into.

I see Palin as a great vehicle.  I do not think she got where she is by clinging to coat tails.  She is an accomplished woman.  She has worked her way up.  My comments are not meant to demean her one iota.  There are some points that do cause me to bring in a touch of reality to this picture though.  And that's what I try to do.

The Population of Alaska is about 683 thousand.  That's about 47th out of 50 states, and represents about 0.22% of the population of the United States. There are eighteen cities with a larger population than Alaska.  One in 455 U.S. citizens live in Alaska.

The down side of this, is that a person who served 2.5 years of a four year term there, isn't going to be viewed as a top notch chief executive, unless they can demonstrate leadership skills and the abiliity to handle the press and the questions of other candidates on the fly.  That's where the 100% comment rested with me.  That's why I addressed it.  She simply cannot make the same mistakes a two term governor or a three term Senator can make, and bounce back.  Her public personna will make her or break her.  And she must be up to speed when she addresses the press or else.  I don't particularly relish this being the case, but it is the case IMO.

Palin's exprience in a small state needn't be viewed in a bad light overall.  As a governor of Alaska, she was exposed to a wide variety of issues that pertain to country life, the environment, land issues, and energy production.  She has a first hand knowledge of these issues, and in today's political environment, that should serve her very well, us too.

A few moments ago, I referred to Sarah as a great vehicle.  To my way of thinking, Palin is a person who has great instincts.  That to me represents a great foundation from which to build from.  If she can develop sound foriegn policy stances, a strong healthy immigration stance, and an ability to think quickly on her feet, she's going to be a formidable president.  She's the latest model of Conservatism right off the showroom floor.  Now it's time to see what options we can install.

Here's to great success with that.

[Jim Robinson]

Well, I can understand her not wanting to be an ungrateful backstabber to the guy who opened the opportunity for her, but it is my fervent prayer that some distance clearly develops between her own naturally conservative positions and McCain’s liberal tendancies as time goes by.

If she decides to run, I’ll be supporting her one hundred percent. As I said, she is a natural.

[Lakeshark]

I totally agree.

*Salutes*

[DoughtyOne]

Wouldn’t hoit... :->

[DoughtyOne]

Okay Onyx. Thanks.

[DoughtyOne]

Thanks again.

[DoughtyOne]

I’m not trying to be snarky, but I’m only going to address what has already taken place. She hasn’t campaigned for him and I hope she doesn’t do that, but I don’t necessarily see it productive to address something that hasn’t happened.

She made a statement. It stands on it’s own. I have addressed that comment for what it was. I’m not trying to be unfair about it. And by mentioning it, I honestly hope it does prevent her from going down some of the wrong roads.

I honestly don’t think my and other people’s criticism of this, should be taken for animus toward her.

Look, I have spent months trying to reveal just what a disgusting politician McCain actually is, so he won’t be re-elected next year. Did anyone think I and others were going to sit quietly in a corner when someone we liked said they supported him 100%?

Your honor, I respectfully object. :-)

Nice talking with you.

[Arizona Carolyn]

Oh.. I don’t think so... I expect no matter how much he has disrespected her she will respect him because of the chance he took on her in naming her to his campaign.. without that she would still be a relatively unknown governor of Alaska... so, this doesn’t surprise me one bit.. she is very pragmatic... something i admire in her.

[Arizona Carolyn]

As much as I dislike McCain, he still votes the right way most of the time... would I prefer JD — absolutely, but so far he isn’t running and I don’t like the other alternative candidates. A whole lot of Freepers better wake up before this country is destroyed... we have to learn we will never get 100% of what we want, but we will get a whole lot more than we are getting right now in the minority and out of power in the WH.

[Arizona Carolyn]

JD hasn’t announced he is running.... so until he does I suggest people get a grip.

[rabscuttle385]

The problem with legalizing drugs, is that there would always be a black market unless you legalized every drug known to man, and allowed every human access from birth. No thanks.

Wait, wait, wait.

Hold up here.

It seems to me that practically every discussion about the prohibition of drugs seems to center on one of three "solutions": either ban them all, don't ban any of them, or ban some but not all of them.

The white elephant in the room that's not being discussed is whether the Federal government should be the arbiter of whether or not any, or all, now-illicit drugs should be legally prohibited.

What about merely returning control over the matter to the States and their constituent jurisdictions, thereby allowing them to regulate controlled substances in much the same way as alcohol and tobacco are regulated today?

The last Federal prohibition clearly didn't work, and it produced some rather unpleasant and unintended side effects; but the present means of regulating alcohol and tobacco for the most part does work.

[Still Thinking]

I agree. Certainly Simcox and probably Deakin aren’t viable. Hayworth’s obviously a much more viable contender in both the primary and general, and I’m pretty sure he’s going to announce. We’ll have to wait and see.

[Virginia Ridgerunner]

Well said, sir! Well said!

[DoughtyOne]

I believe the legalization argument centers around the idea that it would eliminate the black market. I don’t believe it would. As I said, the black market cannot be eliminated unless every drug is made available, and every person from birth on can have access.

Otherwise the specific drugs still denied would be black marketed, and kids under age would also be targeted.

As for the Tenth Amendment argument, you have heard of the BATF. There’s still federal involvement in those products.

Look, the interstate and transnational aspects of drug trafficking make it quite difficult to simply turn it over to the states.

I’m generally a 10th Amendment supporting person, but this one has far reaching implications. If Arizona has open laws, what prevents people from other states from swooping in to partake from states that don’t.

What would stop the smuggling? Once state lines were involved, you’d still have fed involvement.

Like I said, every drug, every breathing human, in every corner of the nation, or you still have a black market.

[rabscuttle385]

That they would outspend the eeeeeevil Republlicans 8 year spending binge in two weeks?

Defining yourself relative to the Democrats means jack squat to me.

If you're not a small government Constitutional conservative, PERIOD, then you can forget about my support.

That's where I draw a line in the sand.

[roamer_1]

I’m not as well able to discuss the Libertarian party vs the civil Libertarians, so I won’t try.

Not to knock the thread off course, but I would suggest that you have a sit-down with Bokababe sometime. She is a brilliant and well reasoned spokeswoman for the civil libertarian folks. I had a great conversation with her a while back that was cut short by my absence (a conversation that I intend to finish one day). While I can predict that you won't agree with her perfectly, I can think of no one better to explain the structural philosophy of the civil libertarians, and the differences between them, the Libertarian party, and those of us who support Reagan Conservatism. I will also submit that you will find yourself far closer to their point of view than any other single faction wrt governance.

Thus my support for the Tea Party folks.

Absolutely.

[...] The Free Trade issue that you touched on is important to me. This global downturn had one interesting effect didn’t it. It’s the one thing that could be a dent in China’s plans to become the global hegemon. And I still believe it only slowed the process.

I am with you 100%. And it is another reason I am suspicious of Palin. I view her fund-raising trip to Hong Kong with a dire sense of foreboding.

The Baker boys didn’t seem to have a problem with that at all. That angered me something fierce. One day, we will face China straight up. Our kids will die due to the treachery I have seen. That’s been my premise since around 1993.

Duncan Hunter is deadly, right on the money with regard to China, and so are you. Globalism is by far the greatest threat to America, and the whole world. And before they're done, our kids WILL die because of it. Not over there. Over HERE.

Whoever our next president is, they need to go to Washington with a meat cleaver. When about 90% of the infrastructure back there is rotting on the cutting room floor, we’ll be back on sound footing, and not a day before.

Frankly, I don't think that will happen. Unless the TEA parties create a huge blowout of true Conservatism (God willing), I think it's all done. We are closing in on $100T in debt, with no end in sight - And both political parties are in the pocket of the globalists.

Since most folks are ignorant to what them Bakerite fellers are, and what they're doing, they'll figure we're saved when the Republicans come roaring back. What they don't get is that it will just be the other leg of the Washington establishment taking another stride.

By the time they're done, the folks will realize that the only thing that can save them is the Conservative principles they have been sneering at... but by then it will be too late.

[onyx]

Thanks for reading the linked material and for your thoughtful reply.

Couric severely edited the interview, but that aside, Sarah should have been first sent to friendly venues at Fox News Channel before being subjected to Gibson and Couric and then only with strict conditions: tape rolling; no editing; no close-ups; interviews conducted at campaign appearances in front of live audiences. I mean, those networks were already in the tank for Obama so they didn’t merit one on one interviews. Those interviews should have been left to McCain.

She’ll need a trusted professional to help her handle the news media. Maybe someone like Dana Perino. I would prefer a real SOB, but that’s the protectionist coming out in me. :)

I agree with you that she has the executive experience and like every governor who seeks the nomination, her lack of “hands on” experience in foreign affairs need not be an impediment, given that she was the CIC of Alaska’s National Guard. She will have time to travel more and to master world events. Obama is such a neophyte, that voters are going to be looking for someone who instills trust and leadership. Sarah loves and respects our military, whereas Obama can barely hide his distain. I hope you were able to read the speech she gave in Hong Kong. If not, she posted excerpts from it on her Facebook page.

I like what you wrote here.... noting that you said “formidable presient” !!!!

“A few moments ago, I referred to Sarah as a great vehicle. To my way of thinking, Palin is a person who has great instincts. That to me represents a great foundation from which to build from. If she can develop sound foriegn policy stances, a strong healthy immigration stance, and an ability to think quickly on her feet, she’s going to be a formidable president. She’s the latest model of Conservatism right off the showroom floor. Now it’s time to see what options we can install.”

Ever since she’s been calling her own shots, she’s met and exceeded my expectations, and she’s not yet a declared candidate. I started calling her “Sarah America” during the campaign and I think it’s fitting. The lines of people at her book signings seem to validate that she is America’s Sarah.

[Arthur Wildfire! March]

Good grief. If Sarah supports McCain over Hayworth, as much as I like her, that’s a very bad sign. Hayworth is a strong conservative and wrote a book about safe borders. McCain?