Posted on 07/09/2010 8:33:42 PM PDT by sinanju
My opinion of Sarah just took a dent. She was on Bill O'Reilly's show and he quizzed her about her opinion, in his overbearing fashion, on how to deal with the illegal alien problem.
I'm afraid it seemed instantly obvious that either she has not spent five minutes looking into the issue and talking to people who actually know something about the problem or she has and is keeping her real plans secret a la Chris Christie.
She did not bring up any specifics or actual ideas and plans and basically let Blowhard Bill lead her around by the nose for seven minutes. They then concluded with some meaningless cheery sentiments about the mama grizzlies and concluded. BOR moved on.
I realize she is busy building up chits playing kingmaker and tweeting and all that but I would like to at least see and hear some evidence that she is doing some serious policy formulation and (if she does run for prez) will have a battle plan on day one.
Appearing on Bill's show for barely enough time to smile and chirp for less than ten minutes is decidedly discouraging to people like myself, who desperately want to take her seriously.
"So you've closed the borders, now you have ten million people sitting here looking at you, what are you going to do about them?" "Make them register?"
"Well, I, uh.."
She should not have set herself up like that. Bill barely gave her enough time to recite the Pledge of Allegiance but she could have gotten her message across if she had had a message.
Not good.
To quote Rush, “words mean things”. There is a “Progressive Republicans” movement:
Excerpt
Open Letter to My Fellow Republicans…
We, the Undersigned, as long-time, loyal Republicans, supporters of the Party’s candidates and its core values of smaller, more efficient government, individual liberty and personal freedom condemn in the strongest possible fashion the circumstances and actions of so-called “conservatives” who have driven Senator Arlen Specter and many of our best and brightest from our Party. We also call on every member of the Party to take action to bring our Party back from the brink of irrelevancy.
We call for the RNC leadership to take this opportunity to begin an honest, frank, open and, most importantly inclusive “soul-searching” exercise, to determine what has been driving individuals out of the Party and to create a comprehensive strategy to reverse this trend.
(snip)
Signed,
Travis G. Johnson (Reston,VA - Founder, Progressive Republicans)
(snip)
http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/gopfuture/
You overlooked something.
(Hint: this letter isn’t about Palin.)
I never said it was about Palin. She’s the one who called herself Progressive.
You can’t claim Progressive doesn’t mean Progressive.
Well, you’re the one going out of your way to capitalize the p, which tells us you know very clearly what the difference is, honey.
That is, Progressive means Progressive, and not progressive. And progressive means progressive, not Progressive.
Palin meant progressive. She didn’t mean Progressive.
But you knew this already, which you proved by putting capital p’s all over your post.
Honey, you must be the only person alive who can hear a small p in a speech, LOL. But, maybe Sarah Palin is using a small p, like Hillary [the woman Sarah admires so much]:
November 12, 2007
RUSH LIMBAUGH: From Politico.com today:
“Hillary Rodham Clinton was asked this summer if she would describe herself as a ‘liberal.’ The Democratic front-runner shied away, saying the ‘word’ — noticeably not using the word — has taken on a connotation that ‘describes big government.’ ‘I prefer the word “progressive,”’ she said. It has a ‘real American meaning.’ Then she expanded the term to ‘modern progressive,’ and, finally, clarified that she was a ‘modern American progressive.’
These are heady days for Democrats. The party is favored by almost all measures in the coming presidential contest. But while Democrats are emboldened, they remain wary of the term ‘liberal.’ Republicans, by contrast, are as unpopular in the polls as they have been for at least 15 years. Nonetheless, the label ‘conservative’ remains in vogue.”
This is a whole story about how liberals don’t like the term “liberal,” and why not? Because it’s accurate! It does mean big government. The way they are today, it means socialist, for crying out loud — and they’re all about protecting their real identities. They’re all about shielding who they really are. They’re all about making you think that they’re people they’re not. . .
http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/daily/site_111207/content/01125104.guest.html
The misunderstanding is not your fault. It’s the fault of the cultural marxists who have turned language upside down.
Leftists call themselves “progressive” in the very same way a criminal insists he didn’t do the crime.
The assumption behind the word progressive is that it means progressing in a forward direction, in the direction of improvement.
But leftists “progress” in a backwards direction, from liberty back to tyranny or from freedom back to oppression.
Palin is only reclaiming the use of the English language. Palin is using the word progressive in the real way, not in the way the political correctionists use it. As always, she’s several moves ahead of the marxists.
Woodrow Wilson was President from 1902–1910. How far back do you want to go for Palin?
“All that progressives ask or desire is permission—in an era when development, evolution, is a scientific word—to interpret the Constitution according to the Darwinian principle; all they ask is recognition of the fact that a nation is a living thing and not a machine.”
- Woodrow Wilson
If you don’t see that Palin is the opposite of a leftist “progressive,” something’s very wrong.
Palin’s first big spending program proposal was based on her own family’s problems. That’s a hint of the future fer sure:
Oct. 24, 2008:
In her first policy address since joining the Republican ticket, Sarah Palin called for parents of special needs children to use federal funding to pick the school of their choice...
Palin also called for full federal funding of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, phasing in an additional $15 billion in funding over five years.
Compare Palin’s goals with President Reagan’s:
During the 1980 presidential campaign, Ronald Reagan dubbed the fledgling Department of Education “President Carter’s new bureaucratic boondoggle.”
Nicely done, Bruce.
Went to a town hall held by my Congressman, Don Manzullo, yesgterday, and we had a couple of Paulites in the back of the room, one of whpom even went so far as to call the Iraq and Afghan wars genocide. It’s sad to see people who care about freedom taken in by this BS. If they’d get off the nut track and help us firm up the GOP instead of backing Congressman Crazy we could really accomplish some things.
Maybe the young ones will mellow out in a few years.
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.