Posted on 02/02/2010 2:47:21 PM PST by RED SOUTH
No one is 100% in agreement with all conservatives, or republicans, or tell me a conservative, Constitution, etc. that agrees with all of the issues of today that are the top 10 to 16 in our government today.
Economy
Defense
Taxation
Health care
Cap and Trade
Pro Life/Anti Abortion
Immigration
One World government
International Law
United Nations
Loss of liberty
Private Property (is threatened)
Gun Rights
Giving away BILLIONS to Foreign Nations
Standing with Israel
OUTRAGEOUS BUDGET BY HALF (cut half or more at least)
Obama is cutting our throat as we stand/sit here
Character matters, and Sarah has stood up to unwarranted assault, and she is grounded in Conservative values.
Look how we all cheered when Brown won Massachusetts
She is superior to Brown on almost any front you choose to name.
we all make our choices. Let us be smart as possible about them. Who do you see on the scene that is a better choice?
Everyone has a failing in some ares. Corruption is rampant, but they are in office. How do you see curtailing the corruption?
God bless America, help us in our day, have mercy and forgive us our lack of vigilance, in Jesus name, amen.
antisocial, I can read, lol.
What I’m questioning, and trying to get all of you to question, is why you blithely accept her (self-serving) statement as fact. You would not so accept such a statement from, say, Obama, now would you?
I’ve already given the reasons I question her statement, so I won’t repost those.
This isn’t an argument, I’m not a Dem, not a troll, and not an enemy. I just don’t automatically accept the statements of ANY politician (and rest assured, she IS a politician). I have never found one that is completely believable, completely honest.
--------------------------------------------
Why take the money at all?
The Tea Party guys are not well funded, Fox reported that they had to borrow just to pay her the first half.
They also reported that the cost to see her will be in excess of $300 per person to cover the payments to her. This will keep a lot of TPers on a tight budget out of the event.
What exactly does "right back to the cause" mean? Will she use the money to build her power base through selected campaign contributions?
As another freeper noted, getting $100k now will position her to get more at the next venue.
Sorry, but for me, there is not a lot here that smacks of idealistic altruism. Rather I see money and politics as usual.
“idealistic altruism”
Is that you Karl Marx or Nancy Pelosi?
I am for making a profit and I don't care whether anyone is altruistic or not.
Making a profit is an essential part of free market capitalism , you know that which gives us all our living standards and all these products like computers, cars, the Internet,building materials, food products, etc. which no government could produce with the level of quality that private for profit companies like Intel, Ford , Verizon etc are producing.
You think you can change our minds with some lies and slander? Your are wrong. You liberals bash and spin and lie about every little thing Sarah and Republicans do to turn conservatives against Republicans when on the big issues Sarah is Perfect. You demand Sarah be perfect ( perfect using Marxist standards) on every little thing Palin does or says or someone said she said.
You liberals lie and slander Palin like the media does to stop Palin so that she doesn't stop your government from growing.
You may blindly follow her or anyone else if it makes you feel good. Others of us are more concerned with thinking things through and seeing clearly rather than basing our judgement on feeling good.
You say I slander palin. Where? Be specific (and remember - something is not slsander just because you don't agree with it).
The facts are the facts...the TP guys have very little cash. palin is taking $100,000.00 to speak. The TP guys had to borrow to pay her fee. That is the fact. Facts cannot be slander.
I have absolutely no problem with palin profiting from this beyond the burden it puts on the TP guys. Ascribing altuistic motive to that profit gets caught in the throat.
If you actually believe (as it sadly seems that you do) that palin is all that stands between us and this republic devolving into Venezuela north then I would suggest that your faith in the American people needs to be re-examined.
I said:
1. Government growth must be stopped. agree or disagree? Yes or No?
2. That electing Sarah Palin as president of the U.S. is the BEST CHANCE that I see of stopping government growth.
I didn't say it was a certainty as nothing is certain.
I didn't say that Palin could stop government growth or save the country from becoming the USSR. I said that I see electing Palin as the best chance of stopping the U.S. from becoming the USSR.
The question that I and many other freepers have asked you Palin bashers is: Who is out there that is electable and is better than Palin ? I ask who has a better chance than Palin of getting elected president AND then of stopping government growth? You and the rest of the Palin bashers refuse to answer that.
Since you can name no one then acept Palin. Nothing is perfect.Least of all you uninformed, brainwashed socialists. You have to accept the best deal you can get. What you democrats are spinning and lying about ( who Palin endorses etc.) doesn't have anything to do with the big issues like wether Palin will try to and can stop government growth.
She is unelectable.
You may resume your name-calling now.
Not true.
You answer then who is more popular than Palin and who is even talking about getting the government out of the economy other than Palin.
Let me guess you are a Romney supporter?
Still can’t answer the question, of is the best chance to stop government growth. I say Palin. Who do you say?
"Not true" (Palin's qualification and electability).
Mayor of a very small town (<10,000) and half a term as Governor of any state does not qualify her for POTUS or even come close. She is better qualified than the current POTUS but so am I. As for electability, the winner in 2012 will need to get at least 70,000,000 votes. Palin is popular with certain segments of the right but she is not at all respected by the millions of Independants, and it is these voters who control the office (as evidenced in MA two weeks ago).
"You answer then who is more popular than Palin and who is even talking about getting the government out of the economy other than Palin."
See above for the 'popular' issue. Palin can talk all she wants about what needs to be done (Jesse Jackson has made a career out of talking) but that doesn't make her qualified to do it. Based strictly on her CV (actual life history vs. speeches and twitters) I don't think she is.
"Let me guess you are a Romney supporter?"
No.
"Still can’t answer the question, of is the best chance to stop government growth. I say Palin. Who do you say?"
I've answered above and many times on FR that I do not think that she's up to the job. As for whom do I support....the answer is nobody. Until there is a list of declared candidates (is there?) it is nothing but mental masturbation to state support for anybody. When there is an actual contest for the GOP nomination I will make my choice and I will support it with logic.
If you care to continue please see if you can do it without returning to the name calling. If you can't then this is my last post to you.
I disagree with all your points against Palin.
Palin did reduce a lot of government and government corruption in Alaska, didn’t take federal government money etc..
Did you read her book? To get her side of the issues anyone that wants to criticize Palin should her book first.
It is my opinion that politicians are mostly statists/Marxists with lower morals than ambulance chasing lawyers. It baffles me that people want an “experienced” politician. It’s these life-long politicians like the Kennedys’s , Mary Landrieu , etc. that have ruined this country. Palin is a conservative, and better in so many ways that any politician i’ve seen.
I disagree with all your points against Palin.
Palin did reduce a lot of government and government corruption in Alaska, didn’t take federal government money etc..
Did you read her book? To get her side of the issues anyone that wants to criticize Palin should her book first.
It is my opinion that politicians are mostly statists/Marxists with lower morals than ambulance chasing lawyers. It baffles me that people want an “experienced” politician. It’s these life-long politicians like the Kennedys’s , Mary Landrieu , etc. that have ruined this country. Palin is a conservative, and better in so many ways than any politician i’ve seen.
I do not though think that she is qualified to run the most powerful country ever on this planet, especially given the economic mess that the next POTUS will be shackled with from day one.
I do not think that she can get 70 million Americans to vote for her. There has already been too much controversy and damage. The manner in which she quit her post is a deal killer for a lot of us (yes, I saw her resignation speech and I read the book). She will be asked a version of this...
"Mrs. Palin, we know what it took to get you to quit as governor, what would it take to get you to quit as President?"
It doesn't matter if that's fair, it matters only that it's real.
She is as polarizing as obozo, who has lost the middle/independent vote. Nobody can win at the national level without that middle/independent bloc. For these reasons and others I do not see her getting those 70,000,000 votes.
My concern is that those who are unquestioning followers will step away from the process and give us another four years of disaster out of spite.
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.