AUDIO/Transcript: Sarah Palin Radio Advert for John McCain's Re-election Campaign (BARF ALERT)

Sarah Palin via John McCain for U.S. Senate 2010 ^ | 2010-02-23

[DoughtyOne]

SJB, I see Palin as John’s replacement. He is grooming her to take his place. He won’t last that much longer. Without Palin, John is seen for what he is. With Palin, the excuses are plausible.

John has connections, and it’s my take that as time goes by, Palin will seen to use them.

If anyone thinks that is misguided, I would urge them to realize that she has actually said (paraphrased) she supports his agenda. She’s already using the same weasle words when it comes to immigration. Let’s not kid ourselves. She’s so far in the tank that her people now trash Conservatives who object to McCain’s shenanigans.

I wish it weren’t so. It is.

[Lakeshark]

Have you gotten over defending D1 for his rant about filibustering the health care bill yet? That was classic idiocy, but something we've all grown accustomed to around here. But hey, perhaps only half the spittle covered the monitor, so maybe it was good after all........

What do two people this dumb and pathetic actually look like?

Overweight big time? Depressed all the time?

[stephenjohnbanker]

” Have you gotten over defending D1 for his rant about filibustering the health care bill yet? That was classic idiocy, but something we’ve all grown accustomed to around here. But hey, perhaps only half the spittle covered the monitor, so maybe it was good after all........

What do two people this dumb and pathetic actually look like?”

---

” LAKESNARK “

LOL

[stephenjohnbanker]

” SJB, I see Palin as John’s replacement. He is grooming her to take his place. He won’t last that much longer. Without Palin, John is seen for what he is. With Palin, the excuses are plausible. “

Never thought of that, but Palin sure did. Palin is out for Palin. She has attached herself to money and power. Same with Carly Fiorina. CF is part of the RINO/McCain cabal

” She’s so far in the tank that her people now trash Conservatives who object to McCain’s shenanigans. “

And Jim zotted 4 of them in the past week.

[rintense]

Honey, I have answered your questions about McCain/Palin ad nauseam.

But, the fact is, you won't answer a simple yes or no question.

Let me lay this out for you, k?

If you had said no, I would have replied, 'fair enough, though I'm sure whatever candidate you support would love it'.

Had you answered yes, I would have simply asked you to justify the yes in juxtaposition to your stance that she's a traitor.

Hell, even I answered a simple Y/N question from McGinnis (BobJ) himself. What was the question? If a RINO picked Sarah as his VP, would I vote for him. Oh, and I answered no.

And I give BobJ credit for simply replying, 'fair enough. Thank you.'

But you want to play the silly little 'its a trap' game.

You and I have engaged in civil debates and have agreed to disagree. But, honestly, DO, with each post, you sound more and more hysterical in your hatred of McCain, let alone Palin.

Yes, I know what's at stake. Yes, I get that YOU hate him. And yes, I loathe the man as much as anyone else (as is evident by my continual, relentless attacks on him in 2008 before he picked Palin). Yet, you've crossed over, where I don't know, to a point where anyone who doesn't agree with you isn't a conservative. You have completely lost all objectivity because of one man. I mean, I understand wanting him to lose- and lose badly. But damn, DO.

You are more than willing to point out how everyone else is wrong, how if they don't see McCain (and therefore Palin) the way you do, they aren't conservatives.

Tell me... is Rush Limbaugh no longer a conservative for saying he 'gets' why Palin endorsed McCain? How about Mark Levin? Is he no longer a conservative?

And when broached with DeMint's fawning over Romney, you simply poo-poo it with the excuse 'Romney (Huck) isn't as bad as McCain'.

Sorry, dear, but a RINO is a RINO.

And Romney, McCain, and Huckabee are all on the same boat- hopefully sinking really fast with no life preserver.

And then there's the list... the list of tried and true conservatives who've endorsed RINOs- including McCain. Oddly enough, it seems conservative's past endorsement history is meaningless when confronted with political reality.

As for your 'claim' that Palin has divided conservatives down the middle... show me proof. And not FR. How about this... When Sarah shows up at a TP gathering, conservative forum, etc. and is overwhelmingly booed, I'll believe you. Until then, you're projecting.

I honestly can't wait for the day when the horse you back has a history of endorsing RINOs. Because it will happen...

A simle answer: yes or no.

Never thought of you as a coward, DO. But it certainly is looking that way.

Don't worry, I won't further confuse you by asking simple questions.

[DoughtyOne]

Agreed on CF, and Jim sure did.

Good start, LOL.

[stephenjohnbanker]

Now if we can just get permission to use class action lawyers to plug the oil leak......

[DoughtyOne]

For someone who says they agree with me when it comes to McCain you are sure one supreme ding-dong.  This lengthy response was generated because you don't like my answer to a question where you supplied two choices.  I told you I wouldn't do what one of your choices was, and you have not accepted that there was only one other option left.  If you didn't want to accept one of the default options you provided, why did you provide it?  You crafted the question.  I didn't.  I simply answered it.

Honey, I have answered your questions about McCain/Palin ad nauseam.

You are not my honey.  You're woefully inadequate to be my honey.  You're not in a suprior postion to me.  I don't deserve to be talked down to by you.  You're a Palin sycophant that as glomed on to me.  You asked me a question.  I answered it, and you haven't let go since.  I tried to be somewhat civil with you, but I'm sick and tired of this B. S.

You DID NOT anwer my questions.  Here was a post with a number of unanswered questions in it.  LINK

But, the fact is, you won't answer a simple yes or no question.

You didn't ask a simple yes or no question.  Only later on did you change the question to suit yourself.  I don't have to play along, if I already gave you a reasoned response to your initial question, and I did.

I answered the question fairly in my first response to you.  Just because you don't like that response, I don't have to buy into your psychosis to placate you.  And the more you badger me about it, the more assinine you come off.  You gave me two options.  I responded that I would not utilize one of them.  That left one option left.  If you can't accept that answer, it's not my problem.  You have demonstrated yourself to be a nut on an internet forum.  Now why should I play along and placate you?  Not no.  Hell no.  LINK

Let me lay this out for you, k?  You can develop a five hour video if you like.  I'm not the one who is confused here.  I answered your initial question, and that's it.  I'm not going to embelish it for you, or change that answer to suit you.

If you had said no, I would have replied, 'fair enough, though I'm sure whatever candidate you support would love it'.  It is vitally important to me that Hayworth win the contested Senate seat from Arizona.  None the less, you, a supposedly intelligent individual, need me to explain to you whether I think it would be best if she endorses him or not.  That speaks volumes in it's own right.

Had you answered yes, I would have simply asked you to justify the yes in juxtaposition to your stance that she's a traitor.  If she had endorsed the Conservative, why would I think she was a traitor?  And did I specifically reference her as a traitor?  I may have, but I generally reference her not remaining true to Conservative principles.

Hell, even I answered a simple Y/N question from McGinnis (BobJ) himself. What was the question? If a RINO picked Sarah as his VP, would I vote for him. Oh, and I answered no.  All well and good, but why are you acting the part of a fool here?  If this was your true thought on the subject, you and I shouldn't have any problem here.  Instead, you're still acting the part of a harpie on the question I already answered.

And I give BobJ credit for simply replying, 'fair enough. Thank you.'  Let me explain how it works, since you're lost in space here.  You ask the question.  You get to think about it.  You get to devise the framing of it.  And then you present the question to me.  If you want a yes or no answer, then frame it that way.  If you want to give options, then provide options.  Just don't come whining to me if I respond to your question with a reply that remains faithful to the way you framed it.   While it is touching what tender loving care you have extended to BobJ, it has absolutely nothing to do with what has taken place between you and I.  Once you've asked me a question, and I have answered, don't come back asking it different ways, because I'm not going to obey you.  Once I've answered, I'm done.

But you want to play the silly little 'its a trap' game.  No..., you wanted to play the silly little you ask a question and I respond game.  I responded, and then you realized that wasn't what you wanted to play after all.  You actually wanted to ask the question more than once so you could triangulate me into giving the set-up response you wanted.  Later on you actually admit it, by telling me how you would have reacted.  Not my problem... Not a game I'm incline to play.  Not a game I'm obligated to play.  Not a game I'm in any way creating a breach of faith, by refusing to play.

You and I have engaged in civil debates and have agreed to disagree. But, honestly, DO, with each post, you sound more and more hysterical in your hatred of McCain, let alone Palin.  Look at the stink you raise in this post.  Why?  Because I wouldn't answer a rephrased question a second time with a yes or no answer.  Look at the length of this monstrosity, and yet you have the temerity to cast this as me being more hysterical.  And I'm sure your specific response on point here seems perfectly rational to you.  No, you owe me an apology.  You framed the question.  You asked the question.  I answered your question openly and honestly.  And subsequently to my doing so, you have swerved off on a tangent, demanding I do what you tell me to or else you'll badger me until I do.

Yes, I know what's at stake. Yes, I get that YOU hate him. And yes, I loathe the man as much as anyone else (as is evident by my continual, relentless attacks on him in 2008 before he picked Palin). Yet, you've crossed over, where I don't know, to a point where anyone who doesn't agree with you isn't a conservative. You have completely lost all objectivity because of one man. I mean, I understand wanting him to lose- and lose badly. But damn, DO.  Look Rintense, we're not talking about someone who has slipped up a few times, crossing over the isle to develop a healthy bipartisain approach to problems facing our nation.  We have perhaps the worst example of a Senator on our side doing what was wrong over multiple decades, that I have ever seen.  So this has gone beyond shades of gray, and you seem to understand that.  Since you profess to, and I accept you at your word, why are you spending time going after me on these matters?

You evidently consider yourself to be a rather wise Conservative.  You have expressed your view that McCain is certainly deserving of your loathing.  And if you are a smart person, and you can see this, why can you not undertand that people we want to endorse, should be able to see him for what he is also?  Why should you want to support someone who is less in tune with Conservatism than you are.  Why would you want to put someone into a position of power that doesn't understand as much as you do when it comes to wholesome policy?  Why are we having this discussion?  You and I should be in agreement here.

You are more than willing to point out how everyone else is wrong, how if they don't see McCain (and therefore Palin) the way you do, they aren't conservatives.  Yes, I am.  I have provided links up thread that reveal McCain for who he has been for over sixty years.  I can tell you that I have never seen a more comprehensive report that destroys a person's qualifications as a Conservative.  Don't take my word for it.  Read it and see what you think.  LINK  You sound like you already have, so I am not expecting you to and then report back.  If someone can't see this guy for what he is, what grounds do they have to claim they are a Conservative?  What grounds do people have to cast their support behind someone who could endorse a man like this, Claiming they were doing it in the name of Conservatism?

Tell me... is Rush Limbaugh no longer a conservative for saying he 'gets' why Palin endorsed McCain? How about Mark Levin? Is he no longer a conservative?  Rush understands it, but is he endorsing McCain?  Did he say he agreed with her endorsing McCain.  No.  He didn't.  As for Mark, I don't know what his specific comments were, or what context they were made in.  I'll refrain from addressing him.  I will remind you though, neither of these men are staging themselves for a run at the Presidency of the United States.  I like Rush.  I like Mark.  On occasion I disagree with them.

I understand a number of reasons why Palin may have endorsed McCain.  It still doesn't mean that I agree with her decision.

And when broached with DeMint's fawning over Romney, you simply poo-poo it with the excuse 'Romney (Huck) isn't as bad as McCain'.  I've not been asked about Demint's fawing over Romney, so you're either projecting here or simply losing it.  As for Romney and Huck, neither of them have a sixty year history similar to John McCain.  I am not a fan of either Romney or Huck, but if I were asked if I see them to be as big a threat to the nation as John McCain, I'd have to say no.  I am not aware of either of them consorting with some of the worst Marxists of the last 40 years.

Sorry, dear, but a RINO is a RINO.  Sorry dear, but putting words in my mouth does not a great case make.  Once again, you have no reason whatsoever to condescend to me.  You are the one defending people for endorsing a traitor to our beliefs.

And Romney, McCain, and Huckabee are all on the same boat- hopefully sinking really fast with no life preserver.  Romney and Huckabee are not my idea of what a Conservative should be, none the less they have not consorted with Soros, John Kerry, Ted Kennedy, Russel Feingold, Teressa Heinz Kerry, the Tides foundation, SEIU foot soldiers, ACORN foot soldiers, and other leftist groups.  Romney probably comes closer to this with his Romneycare boondoggle, but that doesn't a lifetime of degeneracy make, whether I liked it or not.

And then there's the list... the list of tried and true conservatives who've endorsed RINOs- including McCain. Oddly enough, it seems conservative's past endorsement history is meaningless when confronted with political reality.  I have not faulted Palin for joining McCain's team in 2008.  I have faulted her for endorsing him in 2010.  I know a lot of people thought it was important that he be elected instead of Obama, and while I disagreed on point, I'm not saying folks were wrong to excersise their own will on that.  So much for this portion of your rant.

As for your 'claim' that Palin has divided conservatives down the middle... show me proof. And not FR. How about this... When Sarah shows up at a TP gathering, conservative forum, etc. and is overwhelmingly booed, I'll believe you. Until then, you're projecting.  Projecting?  Yep, well from a grand projector, I really appreciate the unbaised opinion.  What forum I choose to pick for my example is up to me. It's not up to you.  As for the TP gatherings, all well and good, but they are not tried and true long term Conservatives.  Some of their focus is excellent, and I support the cause.  That doesn't mean that I see them as the arbiter of what is Conservative or is not Conservative.  And when you implicate that you see this differently, it causes me more contemplation about where you are coming from here.  As for other so-called "Conservative" gatherings that are supported by the Republican party, I'm not going to agree that those forums are splendid examples of Conservative thought either.

Here we have people who have studied the issues and people more than just about any other place in the nation.  We know the issues for what they are.  We know the people for what they are.  So if you expext me to ignore this forum and the experts here in liu of the T.P. folks or the rank and file GOP faithful, you've tipped your hand more than you know.

If people who claim to be Conservative are split here, there's a serious problem brewing.  This forum should be seen as a place where Conservatives can agree on certain bedrock issues and people, not a place that is so torn apart as to be rendered almost irrelevent just prior to an election involving one of the most destructive people our party has ever seen.

We should be leading others, not confounding them.  If we can't desiminate a clear vision, being as informed as we are, what the hell is this forum worth?  That's what is so devistating about this bickering on this forum.  It's what led me to state that Palin has become a terribly destructive force.  We are not unified when we need to be at our best.  Instead we have people like you in denial, trying to tell bedrock people that they are being unfair.  Balderdash!

I honestly can't wait for the day when the horse you back has a history of endorsing RINOs. Because it will happen...  This is your hope?  What lofty goals you have.  We have a chance to replace a diseased letch in Arizona, and the best you can come up with is to denegrate me instead of find ways we can effect that change.

A simle answer: yes or no.  You framed the question.  It was not a yes or no question, by your choice.  Just because you didn't like the outcome, don't blame me.  You have nobody to blame but yourself.

Never thought of you as a coward, DO. But it certainly is looking that way.  I suppose that's supposed to crush me.  Frankly, I see it as misdirection and avoidence.  What I am or am not, does not matter.  It is John McCain who is running for office in Arizona.  It is Sarah Palin who has backed him.  You can think of me as the worst person ever.  It is still John McCain's history that is pertinent, not mine.

Don't worry, I won't further confuse you by asking simple questions.   You are the one that is confused.  You framed the question.  I answered it.  You then blamed me for not wanting to continue to respond on the same point.  I already answered the question remaining faithful to the way you framed it.  Not my fault...  You still don't know that.  You still don't know you are confused on that point.

[rintense]

As usual, you explain away a yes/no question.

Goodnight, DO.

[DoughtyOne]

I gave you a point by point response. If you can’t deal with the truth of it, it’s not my problem.

You are an adult. You have the ability to think cognitively. You pondered the point you wanted to ask a question about. You framed the question the way YOU wanted to. You laid it out there, and I responded.

Deal with it.

[rabscuttle385]

Ooops...Chunga got the zot at 371.

[rabscuttle385]

Have you gotten over defending D1 for his rant about filibustering the health care bill yet?

Please ping D1 if you're going to talk trash about him, Lakesnark!

[Lakeshark]

The post wasn't to D1, he's been man enough to apologize when he realized he was wrong, and that one's over. He showed some integrity.

It's the other two minions the post was addressed to. So far they have shown none, which hasn't surprised me.

Did I ping you on this? Isn't that against some sort of rule?

[Gene Eric]

>> Palin did as much a favor for McCain in 2008, as he did for her.

I completely agree. She owes him nothing, and I stated this repeatedly throughout the week of her initial endorsement.

I view the McCain endorsement as old baggage she can’t shake loose. On the other hand, the AZ constituency should use its brain and figure this one out.

Ironically, less than two years ago, everyone here voted for McCain - nobody’s perfect.

[Gene Eric]

Excellent points!

I’ve been a fan of JD long before this campaign. I hope he takes it.

[Hildy]

Yes.

[DoughtyOne]

Gene, I agree with your lead up to that last comment, but I do think voting to prevent Obama from becoming President is considerably more defensible an act, than voting for McCain against a Conservative.

Arizonans should figure this out. You’re absolutely right.

[rintense]

Good day.

[rintense]

Way to call in Jim, DO. Wow.

Hi Jim!

[rintense]

Deal with this: You gave a frickin essay for a simple yes or no answer then pitched a fit when ‘the question changed’.