Posted on 08/10/2010 5:29:17 PM PDT by pissant
I still like sarah a ton but don’t think she is up to it for potus yet.
I’m still a thune christie guy.
Christie is a gun grabber. Thune is better.
Agreed on both counts.
Yet conservatives universally rejected it. For damn good reason.
Please post links and facts supporting this.
We all know you guys hate Palin, but at least debate honestly.
Thune is by far and away my choice for 2012. He can unify all the cons, the fiscal cons, social cons, gun cons, and appeal to independants and voters looking for a sane, decent, and responsible running the nation.
He is not gaffe prone, polarizing, smart, good looking, and can get voters sarah has no chance with.
My heart says sarah, my head says thune.
There's no evidence that Palin supports this.
You can re-insert your knee back into its socket.
She didn't make a mistake on anything.
She has no official stand on the issue until she declares for the presidency.
Dude, you are sounding like a cultist. Read before you speak.
LOL, I thought you wanted her back in the kitchen the other day and you were cracking me up.
I like Sarah and out of the field of loser we had last time she stood above them.
Romney could have been interesting and I half expected him to be. But, he gave only one speech that really made me say “Yeah! There you go!”
Sadly it was his concession speech.
Mike Huckabee? Brother. He didn’t do a thing for me. Nice guy though. Like his talk show.
We have another 1.5 years to have the candidates settle out.
Keep on posting though. Still think you are hilarious. LOL
But it can be taken out of context. Gov Palin wrote a lot of contingencies to protect Alaskan natural resources into her letter that are left out in the original article. I am not one to call anyone out here. But it does seem that you have a bias against Gov Palin.
I think the world of her. I am on the fence to a 2012 run. There are a lot of filters to consider. But this thread seems to be a stretch of a Governor looking after her state in ways that lower 48ers do not get.
My heart says sarah, my head says thune.-—— i dont see thune standing up for america like sarah is doing— were is everybody, hiding under there desk???? shes the only one making a stand and i’ll stand with her until somebody else has the balls to do it— were is thune (crickets)—
Support for this treaty is not conservative, regardless of the rationale.
I have gone back-and-forth on LOST, trying to genuinely come to a strong position, but I find that either position causes some conflict. Proponents of LOST include Liberals who just see it as a way to tear into sovereignty, and the U.S. Navy who see it as a necessity. Opponents include some Communist regimes who fear it will give the U.S. free reign on international waters, and some Conservatives who think it needs further sovereignty protections before ratification.
I tend to lean toward opposing LOST, but all of my family and their peers in the Navy are for it. We're talking about Paul-bots and rock-solid Conservatives here.
The point is, Conservatives have taken both positions on the treaty; and even some who oppose it only do so on some technical grounds. Governor Palin had objections also, as seen in her letter, out of fears of Alaska getting screwed. Reagan tried hard to get it “corrected” and passed on behalf of the Navy, but couldn't get a consensus even in his own party.
It is a tougher issues than some want to admit. How do you continue to tell the Navy they can't have something they claim is a necessity to do their jobs? On the other hand, how can a Conservative ever trust an international agreement these days?
This one’s not like Health Care “Reform” or bailouts. It's not that easy.
As I understand it, she also agrees with us signing on to the International Criminal Court.
This is what you copied and pasted.
she also agrees with us signing on to the International Criminal Court.
I did not make a definitive statement. I stated I thought she supported signing on to the ICC, because I wasn't 100% sure. I believe I have seen some folks mention it here, and I mentioned what I believed to be true, without saying it emphatically was.
Please post links and facts supporting this. We all know you guys hate Palin, but at least debate honestly.
You changed the impact of my post by slicing and dicing, then seek to slander me because I didn't provide a link. I didn't provide a link because I didn't say it was emphatically true that she had backed the ICC.
And then you have the temerity to chastise me for not debating honestly.
As for hating Palin, what I really hate is the fact that folks are so infatuated with her that they have adopted the Obamaton's proclivity to explain away anything they don't like about their hero, rather than be honest with themselves.
It's not flattering when they do it. It's not flattering when our folks do it.
For more info on just how hard this one is to pinpoint:
http://www.globalsolutions.org/in_the_beltway/united_states_and_law_sea_time_join
The LOST Treaty would affect the whole of America. Our sovereignty should not be usurped by the UN.
She joined the McCain camp and they used the words “Country First.”
She could back away from this yet and mean what she says. She needs to do that.
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.