Posted on 06/25/2011 4:47:29 AM PDT by ejdrapes
And, it should be noted, Palin did ONE, that's right ONE, campaign swing for McCain.
Given the events, statements, etc. since then, if you even think this was anything more than a courtesy endorsement, you're crazy.
There isn't a single conservative out there today that HASN'T endorsed a RINO at one time or another.
I will say this, there is no way in hell I'm voting for Romney or any other RINO ticket that thinks adding Bachmann (or Palin for that matter) will bring the Tea Party.
Too bad so many here can't see that's exactly what the RNC is pushing and planning on.
Palin woildn’t ride on a ticket like that. bachmann, I don’t know. I would hope not.
Because Diogenesis claims Bachmann is looking at Romney with "love in the eyes." I'm showing that one could make the same claim about how Palin looks at the RINO McCain. Can't you see that I'm showing that a person could pull photos out of context and read things into them that aren't necessarily there?
Also, I would not characterize those other freepers as "anti-Palin posters." I certainly am not. But I'm not an anti-Bachmann poster, either. I like both Palin and Bachmann and would be happy to vote for either, if either becomes the nominee.
What I don't like is the idea that ONLY Sarah can be the nominee and that everyone else is a RINO. I don't think that helps. There are SEVERAL Republicans I could see myself voting for in the primary (Pawlenty, Perry, Palin, Bachmann, Santorum, Cain), and I would vote for any of them against Obama.
I really have not been impressed with Bachmann's young campaign so far. It fails the test of addressing situations - badly.
Philosophically, Bachmann should be a logical fallback for a lot of conservatives if Palin doesn't run - but she seems unable to figure out how to position herself so far to gain support if Palin doesn't run - to the contrary, she seems to be closing off avenues if that happens. But try telling that to the Bachmann supporters here. They would rather just pretend that these issues don't exist.
Nor do I. But if one wanted to make the case that "Palin is a RINO!", based on past photos or endorsements--as some are doing with Bachmann and others--that is how that game is played. I DON'T fault Palin for endorsing McCain in 2010, but then I also do not fault Bachmann for appearing at a rally together with Romney in 2008.
So your FIRST post with all those pics didn’t make that point and you just had to double down on it? Read what you just postd to me. My whole part in this was to point out to CRIPPLECREEK that Sarah Palin’s name was not on those signs and to dis mitt romney. If you have a problem with Dio, then address the problem to Dio. Any special reason why you pinged the anti-Palin crew then?
McCain is the person primarily responsible for turning Palin into a national figure. Palin repaid that. It's called loyalty.
Palin has stood with Bachmann many times. Bachmann hires a lout (Rollins) who bashes Palin and Bachmann can't even give the guy a public dressing-down. It's call backstabbing.
The two approaches speak volumes about the respective candidates.
Many here DID that, and were hypocrites that ended up pushing DeMint and Paul.
Palin won’t be VP on any ticket. She’s either all in for Prez, or not.
What I find more interesting is the failure to even consider there might be a deal in place with Romney already. I’m going to grab the popcorn if/when Romney names her as his VP, and enjoy watching many here justifying their support. Of course, here’s a clue: anybody but Obama!
fyi
Mitt Romney is beyond the pale. He is a worthy son of George Romney, the 1968 stalking horse (or east end of same while heading westward) for Nelson Rockefeller whose political career was slain by the jawbone of an ass (his own) when he confessed having been "brainwashed" on Vietnam when his eliist GOP supporters had soured on the war. After all it was not proving to improve their trust funds and stock portfolios. The "brainwashed" blunder was George Romney's final flip flop. The Mittster flip flops on marriage, abortion and all too many other issues. Puhleeze!!! And, NO, it is NOT Mitt's turn and it never will be. He absolutely cannot be trusted on judicial nominations.
Jon Huntsman, having gushed enthusiastically over Comrade O's brilliant leadership while sucking up for diployakker appointments, needs no further disqualification. He has a future helping his Red Chinese buddies to arm themselves against us and make big profits for the family businesses selling out our country and ourselves. He can't even return to Utah which is poised to purge Orrin Hatch for his career of caving to the left. Huntsman is MUCH worse than Hatch. AND Hatch never canoodled politically with the Log Cabin lavenders. Maybe he can run for governor of New York or Massachusetts or New York where he would be marginally more conservative than Coupe Deval or Cuomo the younger. He's gone! He absolutely cannot be trusted on judicial nominations.
Rick Perry? Has Dubya spoiled the Texas brand for now? Possibly, although Cornyn and his fellow senator from Texas are far worse. I have a college student daughter in Fort Worth who would vote for an independent before she would vote for Perry. He has an odor of payoff about him from his attempt to force every Texan 12-year old girl to take the promiscuity protection drug. I don't ordinarily worry too much about immigration issues but Dr. Jerome Corsi has me convinced that the North American superhighway is not a good idea and yet Perry supports it. Like Reagan and Bachmann, Perry is an ex-Democrat who saw the light and he had been a Dem state representative. This is usually an encouraging factor. He apparently has a very good record on keeping taxes under control and creating jobs. Unlike the paleosurrenderman, Perry could be trusted with national defense and projection of military power. Better than Romney or Huntsman BUT who is not better than those two? Desperation move only and even then only after he dons sackcloth and ashes on the promiscuity drug. Ron Paul for straitjacketed life in a lunatic asylum not for POTUS. If we have earned anything under Comrade O, let it be that the POTUS ought not be on permanent autosmooch for the butts of our enemies and that the extension of power by military is not only necessary but is also not a show of some sort or an opportunity to pose for holy pictures, much less a Paulistinian opportunity to showcase treason by ostrich tactics. He's not only gone but he was never there at all. He also effectively favors abortion and gay marriage by his absolute refusal to DO anything but pose for holy pictures while winking and nodding to his libertoonian core supporters who hate morality more than they hate America's enemies. Possible future: a return to his home on the heavenly body formerly known as the planet Pluto, hopefully clad only in a bathing suit. Buh-bye!!!
That leaves Sarah Palin, Michelle Bachmann, Rick Santorum, and Herman Cain. I may be overlooking a few others but not intentionally. Those four, on the evidence to date need to be defended by movement conservatives. Does each have minor errors or drawbacks? As Sarah might say, you betcha! Are they disqualifying??? Nope.
Santorum supported Arlen Spector's last re-election and has paid the price by losing the Senate seat that Santorum had held. There has never been serious question as to his patriotism, pro-life voting and speaking in the Senate, pro-family record. He probably won't be nominated. He probably will be a very fine cabinet appointee. He need not be eaten alive by fellow conservatives. Also, Spector is also gone. One suspects that Rick made a deal wityh pro-abort Spector that he crucify any pro-abort judicial nominees as his price for supporting Spector against Toomey who had been a pro-abort Congresscritter and was not yet credible as a pro-lifer. Taking Rick's Senate seat away resulted in electing the runt of the Casey litter who claims to be pro-life while never seeing an abortion he would not favor as a matter of public policy.
Cain is probably not going to be nominated either but he seems to be a fine gentleman, potential cabinet member or VPOTUS and his only blemish that I know of is his former service on some regional Federal Reserve Board. You cannot attack him without people jumping to the conclusion that race had something to do with it. Speaking of race, he, as a conservative, can make the case that Comrade O has no slave ancestry and to that extent does not share the history of the overwhelming majority of black Americans (who are as disappointed with Comrade O as many of us Irish (the ones with functioning brain cells were bitterly angry with JFK). Cain can credibly say: Is this all there was to what we had waited for? Brothers, sisters, let us stop being embarrassed by this phony!
So far, I think that Sarah and Michelle are the class of the field. I remain open-minded and others may emerge. In any event, bash no conservative at this stage of he race. Revise the Eleventh Commandment to: Thou shalt not attack thy fellow conservative.
High fives!
AMEN Brother!!!!
Weekly Standard = Rep Establishment, no surprise they are pushing MB along with Charles Krauthammer,Chris Matthews,NY Times etc etc etc
Love the fact that Gov Palin is in Iowa the day after MB announces AGAIN, that she is running.... from Waterloo of all places.
Another opinion:
There were hopeful indications, suggestions, soupçons, that Michele Bachmann was an at least incipient dissenter from the Bush / Obama / neocon paradigm on nation-building and “democratizing” Muslim nations.
Alas, it was not to be. She tells a delighted Matthew Continetti at The Weekly Standard:
On Afghanistan, I firmly believe that we are at a point where we’ve got to stay the course, and we’ve got to finish the job. Reports coming out of Helmand right now are positive.... David Petraeus, who wrote the book on counterinsurgency and on the surge strategy, is successfully prosecuting the surge.
Now, President Obama has not told the story the way President Bush did. President Bush did let the country know where we were at, and I give him a lot of credit because when he was getting all sorts of invective pointed against him, he stood against the world for what he knew to be right in dealing with terrorism. And perhaps no other would have stood the way that he did. I give him great credit for that.
Now in Afghanistan, we are making great progress. We have to win southern Afghanistan, then we have to go on and win eastern Afghanistan. I believe that we will be victorious, and we’ll end it. I understand why people are frustrated. I completely understand. But I do trust General Petraeus in that effort and in what he is doing over there. And I think that they are doing what we need to do.
Bachmann apparently has no grasp, not even a tiny hint, of the essential hopelessness and insanity of what we have been doing there—sacrificing our men to build “trust” with our mortal enemies. Apparently the repeated mass murders of U.S. soldiers by their Afghan “allies” has not caused the slightest tremor of cognitive dissonance in the congresswoman’s comely head. And apparently she has never even thought about the fundamental questions asked the other day by Diana West:
Is Western-style nation-building in the Islamic Umma in any way a practical policy?
Are basic American concepts of governance compatible in any way with a culture based in religious and sexual supremacism?
Should Americans be dying for people who, for example, practice child marriage? Pederasty? To whom women are chattel? To whom corruption is as much a part of their lives as air? Whose allegiances, whose belief system, whose natural reflexes default, in the end, in ways subtle and not subtle, to the ways of jihad against infidels?
Could someone maybe arrange a meeting between Rep. Bachmann and Miss West?
—end of initial entry—
Diana West writes:
Such a disappointment—but what else is new?!!
Jim C. writes:
Is Afghanistan worth American lives and taxpayer dollars? Of course not.
JC in Houston writes:
One thing I’ve never understood is how do we “win” portions of these tribal hellholes? It’s been 10 years already. I think the tide of popular opinion IS turning against this misadventure. If only the politicians would get it as well.
Paul K. writes:
It’s unfortunate that in America today you have to spout a great deal of nonsense in order to be taken seriously.
It may be that Bachmann believes what she says about Afghanistan, or it may be that she knows what she has to say in order to maintain political viability. The other night I saw the panel of establishment conservatives on Fox News scoffing at Ron Paul’s view that we have no business in Libya—that alone was enough to make him politically irrelevant in their judgment.
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.