Cheers!
Posted on 03/30/2011 8:45:50 PM PDT by curth
Although I have written several columns expressing my admiration for Sarah Palin, I admit I have never taken her seriously as a 2012 presidential candidate. I've always felt that her greatest asset was as a kingmaker and behind the scenes advisor. In addition I've assumed that she wasn't that interested in pursuing the job but rather enjoyed making waves in the liberal media. The more I read the continuing attacks on Palin and her family I've started wondering why the Democrats and their media lapdogs fear her so much. Even some conservative pundits have determined that she is unelectable because of her high negatives. Those negatives are actually bogus and based on lies and misinformation and there is really only one word to describe Sarah Palin - indomitable.
Bill Maher played to the lowest common denominator and insinuated that Palin was a "dumb tw**t" and his moronic audience cheered. Ari Fleischer, a former press secretary in the George W. Bush administration, said recently that he couldn't see "any way, shape or form that [Palin] can win" the White House. Naturally there was a Public Policy poll that determined that Democratic and Independent voters would vote for Charlie Sheen over Sarah Palin. The fact that there was even such a poll should indicate the vigorous campaign to minimize her credibility as a serious candidate. Who's paying for these skewered polls anyway?
The anti-Palin campaign stretches to foreign media where Canadian TV columnist John Doyle writes in the Globe and Mail that television forever killed Palin's chances to be president. He writes: "television duly destroyed the Palin authenticity. The arc of her national political career began with a defining speech at the Republican National Convention in September, 2008,
(Excerpt) Read more at irishexaminerusa.com ...
Wow, another in-house PDS misogynist crawls out of the muck...
Well, that's a lie and a half...
Palin, the Alaska Bloggers and "Ethicsgate"
Sarah Palin, Barack Obama, And The Cost Of Fighting Chicago Thug Politics
Anyone who wants to submit to the authority of a female may as well submit to the authority of a muslim.
“The leftists heads will explode with joy when the one gets re inaugurated.”
I think they’re already making preps to dumb the Kenyan Commie and run the Hildebeeste. She was named after Sir Edmund Hillary, you know. He became the first to climb Everest only a few years after she was born.
Guess that makes me a troll also, Sarah ain't presidential material in my book either. Not even close.
No sooner do you blast one back down it's hole over there, but another one pops up over here. Almost seems orchestrated. How many times in the past 2 years have we heard from "mmercier?" Yet now its blatting ignorance is taking over Palin threads in all its blissfully moronic glory.
Just one of those things that make you go... "Hmmmm..."
(_8(|) "Ooohhh... donuts..."
“OTJ training works out in a warehouse, not the White House.”
Whenever a major war breaks out, like WWI or WWII, the US military has had to fire the “experienced” chair-warming, backstabbing office politicians who have wormed their way to the top, and get some actual warriors into those slots.
If you have good clay to work with, and your electee is smart enough—and right enough—to gather good advisors, you’re better off with OJT than a politician with long years of experience in skullduggery.
Name calling didn't work so they are attempting to decree her as de facto finished *on their own say so*.
Notice the link about the Zombie movie with the Sarah Palin lookalike.
Someone at the Plouffe / Axelrod level came up with this strategy and the marching orders.
Cheers!
Sounds like a person much like myself that was raised where women were not to head a church and as such not often thought of as leaders in high positions of government.
If stating that makes me a social outcast, so be it. I liked Margaret Thatcher but it always bothered me the position she held. I think and believe it should be a man's job.
You will find many that think as I do, though it is not politically correct to hold such a notion, even here at FR.
But my dislike of Sarah runs much deeper, her selections on who she backs played a part, her management of interviews played a part and a hundred other little items. She has many favorable characteristics and her book was a good read in some aspects. I just don't trust her to represent my views as well as I do some other candidates.
That's OK, nobody else respects you either.
Cheers!
When you're in the kill zone, taking fire, you don't freeze like a deer in the headlights.
And she didn't (like so many RINO pansies) merely retreat.
When she left the kill zone of "target of lawsuits which she had to defend out of her own pocket, no matter how frivolous they were" she sought out a position of greater tactical and strategic advantage.
It's greatly to her credit.
Cheers!
Cheers!
How many threads / replies have you made?
What forums do you frequent?
What candidates do you support?
David Duke? /sarc>
...or (more likely), Mitt Romney?
Cheers!
I will take the bait. Hell no and Hell no. I have several thousand posts and have placed up about 7 threads. You will probable find I am politically about the same as you are. Conservative Christian.
LLS
Your opinion can be debunked by a little researech.
LLS
LLS
I have a memory for unusual handles, and yours certainly qualifies...
Cheers!
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.