Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Palin electrifies crowd in Salina.
http://cjonline.com/news/legislature/2010-02-05/palin_electrifies_salina_crowd ^ | Friday February 5, 2010 | Barbara Hollingsworth

Posted on 02/05/2010 8:10:31 PM PST by Bigtigermike

SALINA — Before a crowd of 6,000 cheering fans, Sarah Palin received rock star treatment Friday night in Salina.

The former vice presidential candidate and former Alaska governor, drew a sell-out crowd to the Bicentennial Center for the Salina Area Chamber of Commerce annual meeting — an event that routinely draws big names to Salina. Past speakers have included Colin Powell, George H.W. Bush, Bob Costas, Margaret Thatcher and Cal Ripkin Jr.

"We've had great speakers in the past," said Todd Davidson, of the Chamber. "No one has generated this amount of interest — even President George H.W. Bush, who came here when he was a sitting president, did not drive this kind of a response."

Even Palin couldn't ignore the excitement her appearance generated. Back stage, she said, a chamber member told her, " 'Man, this is like a Van Halen concert.' I said, 'Man, I wish.' "

In her speech, Palin sounded off on national security, government bailouts and limited government ideals. And she offered lots of praise for the hometown crowd.

"In a time when folks so fear that much is going wrong, your town is an example of how to get it right and how to soar," said Palin, who was joined in Salina by her daughter, Piper. "Shoot, your state's motto even has it right: to the stars through difficulties."

Palin began by relating her experiences as a city councilwoman and mayor in Wasilla, Alaska. What worked there, she said, was cutting taxes, focusing on a few core services and spending responsibly. As governor, she said she learned to take tough stances.

"I'd have to butt heads with my own party officials and the other party, of course too, and the media," said Palin, who didn't meet with reporters on her trip to Salina. "Some things never change. It wasn't always the easy path, but it was the right path."

Telling the crowd she was going to "call is like I see it," she said Washington, D.C., politicians need to "back off." While Americans have lost jobs and learned to live with less, she charged that government has become more bloated.

"Over the past year, Washington has replaced private irresponsibility with public irresponsibility," she said.

The country, she said, needs health reform "not backroom deals." She suggested measures like allowing insurance purchases across state lines and tort reform.

Also, she said the country needs to pursue "all of the above approach to energy." She said increased drilling for oil must be pursued.

"Drill here and drill now and tap our own plentiful energy supplies," she said.

The Obama administration, she said, has lost its way on foreign policy. She said people wonder if the United States is still a "beacon of hope" for freedom.

"We need a foreign policy that distinguishes America's friends from her enemies and recognizes the true nature of these threats that we are facing," Palin said.

In the end, her speech brought the crowd to its feet.

Earlier in the night, Verlene and Joyce Jackson, of Chapman, said they hope to see Palin as president someday and like that she hasn't "always been in that ivory tower."

"She has a fresh outlook," Verlene Jackson said. "She speaks for us. She's a down home girl. I feel like personally, I think she would do a good job representing us."

DeVee Smalley drove in from Superior, Neb., to join her two daughters for Palin's speech.

"I think she is somebody who is trying to reach out to the heartland of America," Smalley said.

Palin will be back in Kansas May 2 to speak in Wichita at a fundraiser for a Christian school.


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Front Page News; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections; US: Kansas
KEYWORDS: convention; election; military; obama; palin; politics; sarahpalin; teaparties
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 121-140141-160161-180 ... 281-290 next last
To: FrancesdeChantel
Give us men Please.

WOW...I am certainly not a feminist at all, but yet..I kind of had a skin (bad) reaction to your comment...specially knowing that the only person about clean and respectable in Congress right now is Michelle Bachmann!

I think you are the one who has his/her priorities wrong.
141 posted on 02/06/2010 12:10:04 AM PST by American Dream 246 (Open your eyes. Freedom is not a one day fight. Enemies of Freedom are legion.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 116 | View Replies]

To: Darkwolf377
"It's now Palin-bashing to simply ask whether a government official made a choice in line with conservative political philosophy. The Cult of Personality reigns. "

And the fact that some of the Palin Fringe are simply not very smart or really knowledgeable enough to respond, so they do what a child would when confronted by the 'bookworm' - they revert to name calling and posting their little Troll Be Gone graphics.

FTR: I agree w/Palin's decision as gov to tax the oil co.'s. It's AK's oil, if Exxon wants it, pay AK citizens for it. (The argument could be made that corps shouldn't pay any taxes because they employ the local populace, other businesses spring up or expand a/c the favorable econ climate, but that's another topic).

When our nation was in its infancy it was sustained by money from tariffs paid by foreign imports. That can create a lot of problems in an imperfect world. And if corps are not to be taxed is it then fair to tax the individual?
If we're to have a govt, at any level, it needs to be funded. I believe it's the rate of taxation, not the tax per se, that causes much consternation amongst free market advocates.

Your questions are legitimate and politely asked. I guess some respond like a resident of Memphis in the 1960-70s might if one was sitting in a Beale St club and declared, "I don't care for that Presley guy, never thought he to be much of a singer".

Disclaimer: jla likes Elvis' songs and does not believe any of the words in the songs' lyrics should be "removed from our lexicon"

142 posted on 02/06/2010 12:13:35 AM PST by jla
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]

To: grey_whiskers
She owes McCain politically

That's how decent people turn into scum politicians, they "owe" somebody and have to "pay off".

You either do what is right because of principle or you do what some people want, regardless of principle, because you "owe" them.

Personally, I was hoping Palin was better than the latter.

143 posted on 02/06/2010 12:17:39 AM PST by Prokopton
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 101 | View Replies]

To: Prokopton
Personally, I was hoping Palin was better than the latter.
>br /> Let's see what happens for McCain. May be - she is bright enough - she will pull a half baked "help" - very short and go back to her speeches. If she goes help McCain for one day only, she will have done her moral duty and it will not help him much. Just enough for her to say that he is a war heroe, which he is and that should be about it, hopefully. Sarah is STILL the best outthere. I trust her if she is President one day, she will be a great president. I am sure of that. So, please, give her a break on that one and see what happens.
144 posted on 02/06/2010 12:22:11 AM PST by American Dream 246 (Open your eyes. Freedom is not a one day fight. Enemies of Freedom are legion.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 143 | View Replies]

To: American Dream 246; potlatch; devolve; PhilDragoo; bitt; MeekOneGOP

That’s the most powerful pro-Palin prose I’ve ever had the privilege of reading. I hope you have the opportunity to speak to one of her crowds of tens of thousands, as she plainly speaks what America needs to hear, and makes the sacrifices that come before her in the next three years.

Hey, what are you doing for the 2012 Republican/Tea Party convention?


145 posted on 02/06/2010 12:31:24 AM PST by ntnychik
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 108 | View Replies]

To: Lurkina.n.Learnin

Aha! Thanks.


146 posted on 02/06/2010 12:42:11 AM PST by Yaelle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 138 | View Replies]

To: Darkwolf377; free me
DarkW, you didn't say you thought companies should be able to drill for natural energy resources on state-owned land for free in so many words, but certainly it's a reasonable conclusion to draw from your claim that it's somehow not "conservative" to charge oil companies money when they extract a resource from state-owned land. In Alaska, a percentage (I don't know how much) of the royalties for use of state-owned land go directly to citizens of the state rather than into state coffers. It looks to me like you are confusing Libertarianism with conservatism. Libertarianism would say that the state had no right to own any of that land, and hence had not right to charge fees for its use.

But the Libertarian ideal isn't in play -- in fact, the state owns much of the land in Alaska. If YOU personally owned land that had a bunch of oil on it, would you allow oil companies to drill on it for free?

In the REAL world, private land owners work out contracts with the oil companies by which the landowner is usually paid royalties that escalate or shrink dependent on the market price of a barrel of oil. Why should Alaska or any other state in the union be any different? Frankly, Alaska's practice of distributing those royalties directly to citizens to spend, save, or invest as they please, is a HELL of a lot more conservative than funneling that money into state bureacracies.

Again, you're confusing Libertarianism with Conservatism.

147 posted on 02/06/2010 12:46:02 AM PST by Finny ("Raise hell. Vote smart." -- Ted Nugent.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Yaelle

I didn’t realize that is this coming week.


148 posted on 02/06/2010 12:50:28 AM PST by Lurkina.n.Learnin (Waste and fraud are synonymous with gov't spending)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 146 | View Replies]

To: Finny
DarkW, you didn't say you thought companies should be able to drill for natural energy resources on state-owned land for free in so many words, but certainly it's a reasonable conclusion to draw from your claim that it's somehow not "conservative" to charge oil companies money when they extract a resource from state-owned land.

Where did I say that?

I didn't, so your whole post is based on what you WANT me to have written, so you could then bash me.

I didn't say it, because I don't believe it, so your post is pointless in the extreme.

149 posted on 02/06/2010 12:55:06 AM PST by Darkwolf377 (Bostonian conservative, atheist prolifer)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 147 | View Replies]

To: lentulusgracchus
My point is that nobody can show "presidential timber" before he's president.

You can believe that, it's you're right, but I don't buy it at all. One can look as someone and think "Whether or not I support this person, he or she COULD do the job."

I look at footage of pre-election Reagan and think "That guy COULD do the job." I look at footage of pre-election Carter and think "Who could buy this moron?" Similarly, I look at many people and think "They COULD do the job, because of the staff that props them up, but that doesn't make them presidential."

Your position is your position. I don't agree with it. Of course one can show presidential timber (not a phrase I care for) before being president--are presidents the only people who are intelligent, brave, can think on their feet, are thoughtful, original, share my values, don't lie, are creative thinkers, well-versed in the history and literature of their chosen field? I look at most folks who've run for president, and they fail my test. I see no reason to lower my standards.

150 posted on 02/06/2010 1:00:53 AM PST by Darkwolf377 (Bostonian conservative, atheist prolifer)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 136 | View Replies]

To: CondoleezzaProtege

Just a note: I sure am enjoying your posts on this thread. Thanks for such good reading and tasty food for thought.


151 posted on 02/06/2010 1:03:28 AM PST by Finny ("Raise hell. Vote smart." -- Ted Nugent.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 125 | View Replies]

To: Bigtigermike

Remember: in the 2008 election, Obama’s campaign had an army of internet trolls posting in forums and pretending to be conservatives. We will see more of this, and many trolls will have old “seasoned” accounts.

Darkwolf377 might be part of this troll army, or he could be a “lone wolf.”


152 posted on 02/06/2010 1:08:10 AM PST by UnwashedPeasant (Don't nuke me, bro)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Bigtigermike; All

If she runs I’m voting for her....and there isn’t a human being alive that can stop me.


153 posted on 02/06/2010 1:09:19 AM PST by Halgr (Once a Marine, always a Marine - Semper Fi)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Bigtigermike

Do not feed the trolls, they will keep coming back. Just like welfare queens.

154 posted on 02/06/2010 1:12:25 AM PST by UnwashedPeasant (Don't nuke me, bro)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Darkwolf377; free me
In post #34, free me wrote to you in sarcastic tones: "No you’re right. Any company that feels like it should be able to drill for oil,gas,etc on state lands for free."

You replied: "Funny, I don't recall saying that. Bit defensive when someone dares to ask a simple question. Guess I touched a nerve."

Early in this thread, you asked, and I quote: "How is making oil companies send checks to Alaskans conservative?" You say it's what I WANT you to have written? IT'S WHAT YOU WROTE. That was the "simple question" that inspired a whole bunch of equally simple, straightforward posts here explaining how yes, it WAS indeed a conservative way to handle royalties paid to the state for extracting oil from state-owned property.

When people explained to you that the checks were royalties paid to the citizens of Alaska for the use of state-owned land for oil drilling, you continued to protest, leading one to the reasonable conclusion that you must therefore be advocating the idea that the oil companies should be able to use the land for free -- either that, or that the royalties paid by the oil companies should remain in the state's coffers, but THAT is certainly not conservative and it would be disrespecting your brains and dignity to think that's what you meant.

I continue to conclude that at the bottom, you're confusing Libertarianism -- the idea that the state shouldn't own the land in the first place -- with conservatism. I suggest that you're inclined to indulge the confusion because such misrepresentations boost the firepower of the ammunition you use to bash Palin.

It's interesting to see how few ways people can find to bash Palin without being misleading. Folks can legitimately bash her for her support of McCain (that bugs me) and for the fact that she did make it more expensive for oil companies to do business in Alaska. Those are two absolutely legit things folks can throw at Palin. But they're both fairly weak in the big Palin picture, so folks who don't like Palin have to resort to misrepresentation and distortion of truth to bash her more effectively.

155 posted on 02/06/2010 1:36:04 AM PST by Finny ("Raise hell. Vote smart." -- Ted Nugent.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 149 | View Replies]

To: Darkwolf377
Further, my post wasn't pointless. It was a dispassionate, accurate explanation written with zero ire.

It looks to me like your nerves are the ones getting frazzled becuase you're lashing out at me for no reason and are shooting blanks.

156 posted on 02/06/2010 1:40:52 AM PST by Finny ("Raise hell. Vote smart." -- Ted Nugent.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 149 | View Replies]

To: Finny
It looks to me like your nerves are the ones getting frazzled becuase you're lashing out at me for no reason and are shooting blanks.

Any rational person can look at what I wrote, look at your loooong, spittle-flecked responses, and make a judgment about who's "lashing out and shooting blanks." ;)

Next time, just try giving a straight answer--then you don't have to get that headache you've got from all yer spinning. :)

157 posted on 02/06/2010 3:03:29 AM PST by Darkwolf377 (Bostonian conservative, atheist prolifer)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 156 | View Replies]

To: FrancesdeChantel

What’s with the rank sexism? Was Thatcher out of line serving as a political leader as well?


158 posted on 02/06/2010 3:05:14 AM PST by 9YearLurker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 116 | View Replies]

To: Finny
In post #34, free me wrote to you in sarcastic tones: "No you’re right. Any company that feels like it should be able to drill for oil,gas,etc on state lands for free." You replied: "Funny, I don't recall saying that." (edit)

Early in this thread, you asked, and I quote: "How is making oil companies send checks to Alaskans conservative?" You say it's what I WANT you to have written? IT'S WHAT YOU WROTE.

Uh, what you CLAIMED I said isn't what I wrote. Where did I write that any company should drill on state lands for free?

Answer: I didn't. You, though, have jumped to the ridiculous conclusion that because I asked "What's conservative about this position?" that means I think any company should be able to drill etc. etc.

You're either a liar, or you can't read. Pick one.

I continue to conclude that at the bottom, you're confusing Libertarianism -- the idea that the state shouldn't own the land in the first place -- with conservatism. I suggest that you're inclined to indulge the confusion because such misrepresentations boost the firepower of the ammunition you use to bash Palin.

And you continue to be wrong, for the same reason.

And, once again, I ask--where have I "bashed" Palin--when I simply asked about the conservative position on something which, we now learn from this thread, was merely her following the state Constitution and not something she dreamed up on her own, or when I said, if forced to choose now, that I would support her over any other candidate currently out there?

I'll put my independence of mind over your silly labelling of anyone as a "basher" as being the mark of a true conservative anyday, sporto. ;)

159 posted on 02/06/2010 3:10:00 AM PST by Darkwolf377 (Bostonian conservative, atheist prolifer)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 155 | View Replies]

To: jla
Legitimate point, but you people calling anyone who might disagree with or critique Palin a “troll” is simplistic and childish”

No.
You trolls(and you are trolls), are simplistic and childish.

And to be honest it's used sometimes because you've no cogent rebuttal to offer.”

That canard has been discredited over and over and over again with very cogent rebuttals, not least of which she is currently leading in the polls amongst Republican voters for 2012, ks the top ratings drawer on TV whenever she appears, has had the top selling political book ever, etc etc).
Of course that hasn't stopped your clowns from repeating it every time anyway.

160 posted on 02/06/2010 3:52:59 AM PST by SmokingJoe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 122 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 121-140141-160161-180 ... 281-290 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson