Posted on 04/13/2010 11:43:41 PM PDT by rabscuttle385
Recently I ran across a video interview in which Sarah Palin enthusiastically declares "I support Michael Steele…I think he's doing a great job. Michael Steele is an outsider. The machine, I think, is tough to penetrate--I think it's been good to have an independent outsider trying to create some change in the Republican Party."
Michael Steele has from the first day of his tenure been a spokesman for the RINO, pro-abortion, amoral, 'money is god' elite minority that presently controls the Republican Party. The statement that Steele is an outsider is an outright lie. He has for some years now made himself the tool of the elite RINO clique. There's only one sense in which Steele is an outsider. He's outside the purview of the conservative views of the pro-life, God-fearing grassroots' majority of the GOP's voting base.
Last week Steele went so far as to validate Obama's ugly abuse of the racism charge. To cover what he himself admits to be his "mistakes" he paired himself with Obama as a black being judged by a higher standard than whites. Obama has lied, broken every election promise, hidden all aspects of his background and never been called to account. No politician in American history has been held to a lower standard of accountability. So what is Steele talking about? Just like Obama and his verbal terrorists, Steele brandishes the charge of racism in order to intimidate his critics, and distract from the fact that their criticisms have a solid basis in fact. This gives aid and comfort to some of the worst elements of the Obama faction's media and political thugs. Will Steele stop at nothing in the effort to protect himself and silence his critics? How then does he differ from the arrogant Obama intimidators that as RNC Chairman he purports to oppose?
He imitates the Obama faction verbal terrorists, and Sarah Palin's response is to praise him for doing a good job. How can people who claim to be conservative go on blinding themselves to the truth about Sarah Palin? Just as they did when she was governor of Alaska, her actions belie her superficially constructed conservative image. In the critical area of her personnel choices she blithely promotes the wrong people, as she did when, as Governor, she boasted about putting a pro-abortion Planned Parenthood leader on the Alaska Supreme Court. Now she backs McCain, and heaps prevaricating praise on Michael Steele, though the words and actions of both men confirm their deficiency in anything that more than superficially resembles sincere, consistent conservative principle.
If Sarah Palin was authentically committed to the restoration of political integrity Tea Party people long for, she would be calling for Steele's resignation, not trying to use her popularity to shield him. I'm sure my words will merit shushing and the usual rotten tomatoes from people once again determined to hand the RINO GOP leadership another triumph of hope over experience. Do Sarah Palin's supporters want people to treat her the way the Obama's media clique treats him? Are we to be mesmerized by her words, but by no means analyze her actions? This kind of mentality herded people into supporting the betrayal of conservatism that characterized the locust eaten years of the Bush faction's preeminence. It's what created the void that Obama stepped into. The last thing America needs is more of the same, sweetened with a change of gender.
Sarah Palin's actions more and more confirm that she is pure and simply a 'Judas goat'. Her assignment is to gain some credibility with the disaffected conservatives in the GOP's grassroots base, then lead them over to RINOs like McCain and Steele (or Mitt Romney and Mitt Romney clones like Scott Brown.) She is a fabrication of the GOP's elite RINO leadership; a tool intended to help them survive what would otherwise be their certain political demise in the tidal wave of anger that is poised to sweep socialists, liberals, RINOs, CINOs (conservatives in name only) and other liberty threatening flotsam and jetsam out of their seats of power and influence. If this is the objective of the move to make Palin an icon of the Tea Party movement, many of the anguished, deeply sincere people who are pouring their hearts and hopes into the movement are simply being set up for another episode of heartbreak and betrayal, and this perhaps the last. If they truly wish to save America's liberty, they should first take care to save themselves this disappointment. It may be we have but one more shot at stopping the elitist juggernaut that means to overturn America's democratic republic. We must aim to make it count.
You posts are not address to anyone.
Who are you talking to?
Because he'd lost to Obammy once already?
LOLOLOLOL........You’re funny!
Keyes occasionaly finds a Truffle.....
Sarah is the President in Waiting!
Rhu Paulites are given away by their obsession.
It was considered at one time (circa 1793) that the children born overseas of U.S. citizens would be ‘Natural Born Citizens’. It was repealed in 1795.
Children born overseas of U.S. citizens are born ‘jus sanguinas’, or citizen by blood, and are citizens by statute. Children born in the U.S. to non-citizen parents or just one U.S. citizen parent are ‘jus solis’, or citizen of the soil. There are legal statutes determining those types of citizenship.
There is no statute for “Natural Born Citizen” because it is natural law - that a child born in a country to citizen parents is a citizen is unquestionable. No statute needed. Our founders knew what the definition of a natural born citizen entailed.
One should keep in mind that there is no right to be President. “Natural Born Citizenship” is a circumstance of birth that only applies to the elegibility requirement to be President - nothing else. It is a form of national security to prevent a President with split allegiences.
Because after playing the "race card" himself, he turned tail and joined up with (or formed, take your pick) a new party. As such, his opinions on matters RNC are as valid as the Democrats', which is to say, not at all.
And I say this as a 1996 and 2000 Keyes supporter. By then end of the 2000 primary season, I had finally realized that Keyes is all about self-aggrandizement, manufactured moral outrage, and a complete and utter lack of doing anything actually required to be put in a position of governance.
onyx, rabscuttle385 is not the only person here questioning the temperament of Palin's followers, or the judgment and qualifications of Palin herself.
The skeptics and critics comprise a very diverse group - many of whom vehemently disagree with one another on other topics.
I would agree that she is a populist politician with conservative instincts and without a consistent ideology. However, I also see her support for Alaska's tax on oil companies, bridge to nowhere, her resignation, support for McCain and Steele and simultaneous support for Tea Parties as all calculated career moves.
I don’t know why they won’t go after Obama’s birth as a subject.
I suspect they really, really want to put a stake through the heart of progressivism/liberalism/socialism in this country first, then drum Obama out because he isn’t a U.S. citizen.
In the meantime we’ve got front row seats and watch our nation enduring Hell.
“...[McCain] if he was born on a US installation or in some circumstances, born to US parrents serving the US in a foreign location, he was born on US soil and is a “natural born” American.”
John Sydney McCain was born in a public hospital in the city of Colon, Republic of Panama.
I’ve talked to two immigration lawyers who tell me that there are legal statutes dealing with the citizenship of children born in Panama to U.S. citizens.
McCain is a citizen-by-statute (jus sanguinas) because his parents were citizens. He is not a ‘natural born citizen’.
In all the years we have known one another, this is likely the first time I don't think you deserve a reply from me. My statement stands. The punk I cited is a disruptor. He doesn't 'question,' he attacks, just like a rabid dog. I'm surprised that you don't see that. Sad.
Honest differences are one thing, but a constant drumbeat of deceit, half truths and the hiding of his reasons for hating her are what we have against him. Most of us have questions about Sarah, as we do of all candidates, she's not perfect (neither was Reagan, but I sure liked him). For most of us, she seems to fit the description of the best conservative to come against the Obama agenda, and if she runs, the best candidate.
You have that backwards. To give you an example, I would say that I take Sarah Palin at her word when she says McCain is the best person for the Senate in Arizona. But many of her supporters argue that I am wrong, and that Sarah is only saying that because she feels she has to be loyal to McCain.
Which, if you believe that, means they say Sarah Palin would lie about McCain out of loyalty.
So, who is the better Sarah Palin supporter? The guy who believes what she says, or the one who argues she must be lying because they don't LIKE what she is saying?
Thanks.
:-)
Well, just dayum and I am ulti-tasking too.
Tons of FR mail and I am way behind on pings and I have a new ‘student’ today from your state. So there.
Happy teaching. Hope they aren't as dense as I was.
I find you and your little pack of political GOP groupies disgusting...
The woman supported and aided and abetted a known open borders, pro amnesty politician.
Some of us will not tolerate that behavior and would rather juggle chain saws than continue to get screwed by people that talk out of both sides of their mouth. Been there done that. Not again.
You and your political groupie clan will just have to deal with it.
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.