Here’s an idea my FRiend, instead of trotting out the usual ‘Rabs is a PaulBot, Rabs has horrible judgment’, etc., perhaps you could explain to us WHY Sarah Palin should automatically receive our support when her own words (quoted accurately in Rabs’ post #2) suggest that she is certainly NOT a consistent conservative?
Sure, she supported O’Donnell in Delaware, we all want O’Donnell to win. She has supported other conservatives, and likewise: we want them to win.
She has also supported abominable RINOs, to the exclusion of better qualified conservative candidates.
C’mon, anyone can call Rabs a ‘PaulBot’ (which isn’t even accurate these days), but why not address the legitimate question of Sarah Palin’s conservative credentials?
Any potential candidate that says that she ‘shares John McCain’s vision for America’ is no conservative in my book.
In last month’s primary in Arizona, she had the unmitigated gall to actually call McCain a “REAL CONSERVATIVE”, surely you don’t buy into that, now do you?
What it comes down to, is that if Sarah Palin is stupid enough to believe that John McCain is a conservative, then she has no business as the GOP nominee, and certainly no business as the President of the United States. On the other hand, if she fully understands that John McCain is NOT a conservative, that he does NOT represent the best interests of these United States, and yet she went ahead and lied in his behalf, annointing him as a conservative when she knew it wasn’t true, that would establish that she is a prevaricator, a manipulator, and someone not to be trusted when it comes to conservative values.
If you think I’m wrong about this, I’d appreciate you explaining it to me, because I believe at this juncture that Sarah Palin is a.) not qualified to serve as President, and b.) will lead the GOP to a 1964 style debacle if she is nominated.
A REAL is an old Spanish coin.
Your little group has already identified itself as Palin haters. Nobody I know is going to bother trying to convince otherwise. Sarah Palin does not need your support.
What it comes down to, is that if Sarah Palin is stupid enough to believe that John McCain is a conservative, then she has no business as the GOP nominee, and certainly no business as the President of the United States
Change this to: What it comes down to, is that if Ronald Reagan is stupid enough to believe that Richard Schweiker is a conservative, then she has no business as the GOP nominee, and certainly no business as the President of the United States
Schweiker had ACU ratings of 38, 9, and 18 the three years before Reagan nominated him as his veep choice in 1976. Schweiker was far, far less conservative than McCain could even contemplate, yet he was going to be Reagan's first veep choice and actually served in his cabinet..
Think about it hard before posting that "Palin isn't consistent because she endorsed McCain" meme again please.
One word will answer your entire long-winded question about Sarah Palin’s support of John McCain in his latest re-election bid, and that is:
PAYBACK.
Live with it. It’s a reality in politics. It’s now done and over with.
There was no way DeVore was going to win the GOP primary, let alone a CA general election. Palin wanted to stop Tom Campbell and she did.
Nathan Deal is conservative but totally corrupt. He left Congress prior to a potential ethics probe. He may be indicted before the November election. He is running neck and neck with the Dem and in GA he should be way ahead in 2010.
Lamontagne is to the right of Ayotte, but at the time Palin endorsed Ayotte Lamontagne was in single digits in the polls and liberal Republican Bill Binnie was closing fast on Ayotte.