Posted on 01/20/2010 10:29:12 AM PST by Def Conservative
I have no idea why he hasn’t declared. He’s been mulling his decision for weeks, if not for months, but like you, I don’t live in AZ either.
JD Hayworth was a very good US Representative but he was narrowly defeated by a democrat. He’d make a might fine US Senator and he has the backing of Sheriff Joe, but his time to declare is quickly running out.
I see. That’s one reason McCain wants Sarah’s support now - to keep any conservative thinking about opposing him at bay. I hope his tactic doesn’t work!
I don’t know that Sarah would campaign for him right now “if” he had a primary challenger.
If JD plans to run, he’d better do it NOW.
“I see. That’s one reason McCain wants Sarah’s support now - to keep any conservative thinking about opposing him at bay. I hope his tactic doesn’t work!”
Folks, we have a WINNER !!
Who cares. She’s neither the rudder nor navigator of Conservatism.
This is a blessing in disguise.
I am not a Palin person but I think that this is a very classy thing to do. Kudos to her.
You should go back to sleep.
Meh...I still think for myself. Palin’s endorsement doesn’t mean I can’t or won’t vote for McCain’s opponent.
Even the most principled politician sometimes needs to compromise on his/her principles if he/she wants to accomplish anything.
Example: The founders compromised in the US Constitution on the issue of slavery. They could not resolve the difference between the principles on which they sought to found the nation and the demands of some that slavery be maintained. So, they punted, leading to the greatest crisis America was to face.
That didn't take long? You act like you didn't realize that Scott Brown allowed McCain to campaign for him during the election. What did you think Scott Brown was going to do about returning the "favor"?
Reminds me of some of the posters on this thread who apparently didn't realize that Sarah gave to McCain's PAC months ago and now they are soo surprised that Sarah will be campaigning or McCain.
I have been prepared for and expecting this...unfortunately. Sarah has some political paybacks that have come due. Hopefully this is the only (albeit HUGE) one. I made a promise in 2008 to contribute LARGE to any (R) candidate for Arizona senate who would run significantly to the right of Juan McLame, and that’s a promise I’ll keep. I’ll still support Sarah, but am hopeful that what she’ll learn from this is that conservatives are about the politics of principles, not personality. I think she may already know that, but the message must be sent to her (and others in the GOP) loud and clear. I’d love to see conservatives get behind the anti-McLame (R) candidate nationwide, the same as they did Scott Brown.
I admire her loyalty and grace.
You have it exactly reversed. I’m not boxed in any corner, you are.
I believe she wasn’t fully sincere when she advocated for McCain, she wanted to advance the conservative cause, and believed accepting the nomination for VP was the best route to that end, even though she had some reservations about McCain. And right now, she still believes that to be the case, that advancing the conservative cause requires her to maintain her credibility and hence she cannot backtrack publicly what she said about McCain 14 month ago. So she is supporting him.
You, on the other hand, wants her to be “pure” now, and reject McCain, even though her acceptance of the VP nomination was in of itself “impure” by your definition. So if she was never “pure” to begin with, not even 14 month ago, why the charge of “she’s changed”. You can’t castigate her for supporting McCain now and yet say it was OK for her to accept being his VP. These two acts come together. When she accepted the VP, she committed herself to being McCain’s advocate for quite some time. Maybe by 2016 people will have forgotten what she said about McCain, but in 2010, she’s going to have to stay consistent with what she said in 2008.
She is also campaigning for Bachmann, By doing so is Palin on Bachmann's "side" or that of the "USA public"?
It's very interesting, to say the least, how you people only wish to focus on one aspect of this - and that is whatever might lend an air of credibility to your scheming.
To say that Palin supports, tacitly or not, illegal immigration because she'll campaign for McCain is disingenuous. One can then say that she does not support illegal immigration as evidenced by her campaigning for Bachmann.
By campaigning for someone does not mean that Palin espouses all the opinions of that person. If we held candidates up to that litmus test then Reagan would have failed miserably.
"...she's not the savior we would all like her to be."
What's this "we"? You and your despicable little group misrepresent and malign Palin continuously.
From another article: ""I'm looking forward to getting back on the campaign trail with my former running mate, and I know my fellow Arizonans will welcome her as well," McCain said. "Sarah energized our nation and remains a leading voice in the Republican Party." Here.....
Excellent analogy, faulty conclusion.
Freepers of a certain age do have a sort of familial feeling for this dynamic younger woman. This is like watching a very talented daughter, or younger sister, make a serious life mistake.
With one's own children and relatives, one doesn't often have a vote. With Sarah, we definitely do. McCain done her wrong. To re-identify herself with his failures and attitudes is simply a mistake.
Unless of course, she believes in the same things as McCain, including blanket amnesty for illegal aliens. In that case, we made a mistake.
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.