Why should she give up her strategic advantage?
To make it "fair" for the RINOs and 'Rats?
Palin is coming, and the Tea Party is coming with her.
Posted on 09/05/2011 4:43:32 PM PDT by STARWISE
Sarah Palin revved up a crowd of about 2,000 at a tea party rally here, telling them just about everything they wanted to hear — except that she was getting into the presidential race.
Instead, the Palin supporters who came from all over the U.S. wearing “Palin 2012” T-shirts and buttons got an intensely political speech from the former Alaska governor that scorched President Barack Obama and the “permanent political class” of both parties.
She slung an attack at the Republican candidates who “raise mammoth amounts of cash,” saying, “we need to ask them, too: What, if anything, do their donors expect in return for their investments?”
She noted gleefully: “I don’t play that game, either, of hiring expert political advisers just so they’ll say something good about me on TV.”
((Video and transcript of Indianola 9/3/11 speech is on the page))
(Excerpt) Read more at nation.foxnews.com ...
Seems like there's apparently a different dynamic in play as it relates to Palin coverage now.
Also, the article is on the Fox News Nation site, NOT on the main Fox News site, and is written by Molly Ball of Politico. And at the bottom where it says "read more," it links to a completely differently titled Politico ARTICLE by Molly Ball about the Indianola speech on 9/3/11.
At the Fox News site front page, there are 3 relatively small mentions of her .. no headline-type items.
.. Ping!
Give ‘em hell Sarah!!!!
Why should she give up her strategic advantage?
To make it "fair" for the RINOs and 'Rats?
Palin is coming, and the Tea Party is coming with her.
So what are Republicans supposed to do? NOT raise large sums of money?
What about media stars? Should THEY get large sums of money?
(Just asking...)
She’s got a point about well moneyed candidates. At least in her case (if she were running) they’d get a nice book.
Rich donors might actually agree with the politics. Sometimes the simple answer is the right one.
Things get more vague when special interest donors are involved, ones that just hope to “bribe” the upcoming government to go their way.
She’s probably still under contract and they aren’t risking the FCC’s equal time law.
Maybe it is all about that ..
Whatever it is, it’s noticeable.
I don’t frequent the Fox Nation site, just happened upon it from Drudge instead of FNC. Maybe it’s not a new practice, but I was surprised the article wasn’t under an FNC byline but was Politico.
That’s my guess.
Soros' money surfacing????
But like it or not, Obama is going to raise somewhere in the neighborhood of one billion dollars. Even if that’s doubled by hype, it’s still 500 hundred million.
I don’t care how grass roots your campaign is, if you can’t raise adequate funds against the coming Obama onslaught (and don’t forget all the MEGA MEDIA COVERAGE he gets FOR FREE), then how in heck are the Republicans supposed to have a prayer?
I know what Palin’s point is, corruption is corruption, but I just don’t know if tactically, or even strategically, this is the right “cause” to take up right now.
How about ObamaCare? A GIGANTIC specific evil doing GIGANTIC specific damage? (And it DOES happen to be a SINGLE PARTY EVIL. No moral equivalence possible.)
What if it takes a lot of fund-raising to bring Obama and ObamaCare down?
Justified? Not justified?
I mean really, Sarah, WTF?
Are we fighting Obama or are we picking our feet in Poughkepsie?
A large part of a candidates war chest goes to pay those hired gun politicos. IMO, they are leeches of the worst kind. They haven’t any loyalty. They win even if the candidate loses. You also have to wonder how attached they are to the candidates message. Perhaps they are being paid by another candidate for the purposes of sabotage.
I’m not at all worried about Obama’s huge campaign money.
There will be so much spent by both sides in 012 that the average voter will be sick and tired of campaign commercials by the middle of September.
If the contest were merely one of which candidate has been heard the most, Obama would walk away with it. But hopefully people will stay focused on what makes sense for them. The Obama depression and mismanagement has come home to them personally and no they don’t believe in Hope And Change version 3.2. Obama publicity may be its own worst enemy for its palpable hypocrisy.
In which case, it doesn't really matter all that much who wins, as long as we all take a highly moral stand against political fundraising.
Wow. Sounds familiar. Sounds like someone from back in the 2008 campaign... and that someone I'm thinking of is NOT Sarah Palin.
Is she channeling her mentor?
I understand what you are saying. And there are many examples of out-spent candidates triumphing in elections.
But still... one billion dollars (or five hundred million)... you can disparage that if you want... but I think it’s VERY risky to do so.
And the point of taking that risk is what? CAMPAIGN FINANCE REFORM?
IS THAT WHAT WE’RE TALKING ABOUT HERE????
I think she learned that lesson well from 2008.
“Money will never buy a true friend, only a future enemy!” (Randy Larsen 2011)
I don’t feel that way at all.
I think there will be huge energy of anti-Baraq patriots that will sweep him out of office.
Then I hope that our next POTUS deports Obama’s illegal relatives and Obama himself if he can’t produce credible evidence of being a US citizen.
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.