A GOP Debate, an Obama Speech, and Sarah Palin

The North Star National ^ | September 7, 2011 | David Karki

[Springfield Reformer]

There’s not a darn thing wrong with someone having a different opinion than yours or believing their candidate will be a game changer. While Perry is my second choice after Palin there are things I have reservations about. I’m getting just a little sick of the name calling. Perry’s supporters, while quick to judge Palin supporters are just as passionate. Nothing wrong with that either. I don’t see the point of the 2 sides going on each others’ thread and putting them down. I’ve yet to hear issues, real issues discussed by either side. I mean solutions, their stand on conservative principles. The debate turns personal and insulting. It’s getting very, very old and not reflecting well on FR. I expect that out of DUmmies. We should be better than that.

I'll take one of those ....

[smoothsailing]

I may have been a bit premature in some cases, however... :)

[PSYCHO-FREEP]

Are “childish name callers” in the same category as “jerks”?

(Just wondering)

[Yosemitest]

Let's review what Palin has said on Border Security and Immigration:

From Great Van Susteren ON the Record, May 10, 2010


PALIN: I'm proud of Jan Brewer for standing up for the constituents in her state, sending a message to Washington, sending a message to President Obama saying,
Hey, you need to do your job, sir.
And if you're not going to do it, OK,
then we are compelled to do the job for you until you get it right.

President Obama has been suspiciously silent on this issue, hasn't he?
We don't even know where he stands on immigration reform or securing our borders.
He doesn't talk about it. He gets to punt on that one.
And that's unfortunate because this is a big issue. It's all about national security.
It's about our sister border states that are inundated with violence and with crime
because people illegally crossing the border, engaging in illegal activities for too long now.
And some of these border states are saying, Now we've had enough.
I admire Jan Brewer for taking a stand.

VAN SUSTEREN: Why do you think -- I mean, for 20-some years, maybe even longer, even going back to President Reagan --
everyone has always said, We're going to secure the borders.

PALIN: Yes.

VAN SUSTEREN: Nobody has done anything.
I mean, or almost nothing.

PALIN: Because they've made it political and they haven't understood that unsecure borders isn't fair to anybody.
It's not fair to American citizens who ware here legally, paying taxes, following the rules, doing all the things that an American citizen is expected to do.
It's not fair to them.
But it's not fair to the illegal aliens, either, here.
They want to come pursue an American dream. Some of them do want to be here to work.
But they're forever going to have to hide because, you know, government's going to crack down on them when (INAUDIBLE)

So they need to follow that path of legal citizenship, obviously.
But these politicians, presidents in the past who have not secured the border, they've made it a political issue.
They haven't wanted to tick off a potential base of Hispanic voters, so they haven't made the tough decisions.
And that's no way to solve the problem.
That's no way to solve any challenge in America,
by ducking and hiding and creating division and making these partisan issues out of it.

VAN SUSTEREN: Both parties have made promises.
I mean, we pull up sound bites where, you know, both sides, you know, Democrat, Republicans, say, you know, Secure the border, secure the border.
And then once in office, we certainly don't see a whole lot of action.
Had the election gone another way, or even if you were president, what would you do about immigration?

PALIN: The very first thing is literally secure the border!

VAN SUSTEREN: How?

PALIN: People mock the idea of a fence.
What's wrong with building a fence?
Yes, let's physically secure the border. Let's ramp up border control.
Let's provide the tools for those who are putting their lives on the line in order to stop illegal immigration of these aliens.
Those are a couple of things.

And then you don't start talking about amnesty, either, kind of as this last-minute,
Oh, anybody who's here in the country right now, we're going to provide you amnesty,
and even though you've broken the law and we are a nation of laws, you've broken that, we'll still give you --
because then there's going to be a huge influx of those wanting kind of at the last minute to come over the border
because they know that they will forever then receive that amnesty.

So you don't start talking about that,
but the very first thing you do is physically, literally secure those borders.
It baffles me and most Americans why for all these years presidents, administrations have spoken about it but never done it.


Then what did Palin say From the O"Reilly Factor Interview July 9, 2010

O'REILLY: So you're president of the United States, Sarah Palin.
You send how many National Guard to the border right away to secure it?

SARAH PALIN, FORMER GOVERNOR OF ALASKA: However many you need. This is a top priority.
This is a national security issue.

O'REILLY: All right, but I'm talking Texas, California, New Mexico, all of them.
So you'd send maybe 10,000, 15,000 National Guard down there to assist the Border Patrol, yes?

PALIN: Whatever it takes. Whatever it takes.

O'REILLY: All right, so you'd militarize the border.
You'd finish the fence, finish building the fence from Brownsville to San Diego, yes?

PALIN: Yes.

O'REILLY: Ok, the people watching this program have it.
We have it. We assume that you, as president, would secure the border.
I have confidence that you would do that.
But now you have to look inward, all right?
And you've got 12 million people staring at you.
What are you going to have them do?

PALIN: You're not going to give them a free pass.
You're not going to say, OK,
you and anybody else who wants to scurry across this porous border between now
and when we finally do finally get it fenced in and physically secure, we're going to give you a free pass.

O'REILLY: All right.

PALIN: And just because you've broken law in the past…

O'REILLY: So no amnesty.

PALIN: …we can trust you? No, no amnesty.

O'REILLY: But what do you do with these folks?

PALIN: Which means…

O'REILLY: Do you make them register with the federal government?
Do you tell them they have 60 days to get out of here before we put you in jail?
What do you do with them?

PALIN:Do we make them register with the federal government?
Yes, we do.
We're not going to give them a free pass.

O'REILLY: So you make them register with the federal government.

PALIN: We're not going to reward the bad behavior.

O'REILLY: And if they don't register with the -- say you gave them 60 days to register with the federal government.
There's a form at the post office they have to send in like a Census form.
All right, say they didn't do it.

PALIN: You deport them.

O'REILLY: OK.

PALIN: You have to get them out.

As to jobs, American citizens who are here lawfully, they need to be the ones with the first shot at getting these jobs.
We cannot make it easy on those who have chosen to be illegally here to disobey our laws.
No.

O'REILLY: No, we can't make it easy, but they're here.
And we can't starve them to death.
And if they can't work, if they don't have a green card to work, they're going to be hosed.
I mean, they got to pay rent, they got to buy groceries…
whoever the next president is, is going to have to deal with 12 million people.
And that's going to be very, very difficult.

All right, let me switch gears here.
This is frightening me, governor. I'm getting very, very afraid of mama grizzlies.
And you are, I guess, the mama grizzly chieftain.
Am I -- why don't you explain what the mama grizzly deal is?

PALIN: Mama grizzly in a political sense is
someone who is watching what is going on that is adversely affecting our cubs, our children, the future of America.
And there are a lot of common sense, constitutional conservative women who are willing to put it all on the line and run for office
or support candidates willing to run for office to take this country back…

O'REILLY: All right, so this is a clarion call.

PALIN: …and not allow the Pelosi, Reid, Obama administration and agenda continue to put us on a path towards insolvency…

O'REILLY: OK.

PALIN: …to put us on a path toward a less secure and less free nation.

O'REILLY: So you are trying to mobilize mama grizzlies all over from Anchorage to Key West from San Diego to Bangor, Maine, to get involved,
either run themselves or support candidates they like.
This mama grizzly movement is going to take over the country.

PALIN: It's all about stopping Obama, Pelosi and Reid
and what they are doing to our country, to our children and our grandchildren and their futures.

You can't get anymore clear and pro-LEGAL/anti-ILLEGAL than that.
It's a crying shame that Perry doesn't have that kind of backbone.

[PSYCHO-FREEP]

Well said! A more adult exchange would be nice. Checking my posting history, you will find very few personal attacks in my responses. If they are evident, I only make them if I am attacked first and I still keep them at a level of respect or I repeat them on the level, as an observation of the attacker's poor civil behavior.

Even still, the insults, nasty responses and the name calling I get when I confront them, is way over the top. The simple solution that would help all of us here, would be for it to stop.

I no longer comment or voice my opinion of Palin threads, because it's obvious it is way too late for her to enter now. Instead, I garner support for my candidate, Rick Perry and merely defend him as best I can, without trying to start an on going fight.

It alarms me to see the same group who complain so loudly about the “PDS Palin Hater club”, yet, I have never witnessed so much hypocritical rhetoric from those same posters on the Perry threads. Had there been such a hateful and nasty tone towards Palin on their threads, there would be thousands of fewer freepers left to support anyone but Palin.

It is a shame to see this great forum denigrate itself in such a way. Hopefully, this can and will change very soon.

[Norm Lenhart]

“because it’s obvious it is way too late for her to enter now”

The above posting of opinion as fact is the primary reason for both the forum degeneration of which you speak and many of the attacks. Palin supporters are sick to death of it. Even a few non supporters have mentioned that.

So do your part to up the tone by posting accordingly and all your ‘concerns’ will solve themselves. The problem starts and ends with you, not “us”.

[Cyber Liberty]

Oh yeah? Well, $*#@@)(*&$!!! And, *$*%^(#&@! And furthermore, *$&(#^$%&*$^@#%@%@&#)$)$*)$&@#^#*! And, in conclusion, &#^#^@&^$% &(*%*%&Y#&6 @(#*$^$%^%#!

So there!

(Do I HAVE to /s?)

[Piers-the-Ploughman]

i saw a clip of Newt at the debate. great smack down of the moderator. Newt is an articulate smart guy, and probably could have been president, but the global warming-nancy Pelosi thing and then Dede Scozzo endorsement et al just makes him kryptonite. he was too old in politics to claim these as honest mistakes.

Perry- lot of good things for him but La Raza , how awful. Open borders too. Squishy on crony capitalism.

I will probably vote for any R but Sarah is #1.

How’s that? No insults, discussion of issues, and Sarah is #1!

[RedMDer]

Bump!
The only thing I would change is...
O'REILLY:Interrupts again,

[altura]

Nope. they beat you. But then, that’s all they live for.

[TheOldLady]

Prokopton has a point. If the supporters of Gov. Palin are tearing down the other candidates rather than touting her assets, there is nothing wrong with his pointing that out.

So far I don’t see his being rude nor snide, just stating his opinion of the facts as he sees them, although the “hater” comment was a bit provocative. There does seem to me to be a bit of overreaction on our side to his comments, and tempers are flaring a bit. Prokopton is a supporter of the governor, and we shouldn’t be attacking our own.

We may be doing a bit too much tearing down her rivals instead of campaigning for Sarah Palin.

[ConservativeDude]

well if Palin runs she can raise that as an issue, then, can’t she?

[Gargantua]

No, he's not Ben Steyn... but you may be familiar with who he is——on FreeRepublic, that is...

;^\

[Gargantua]

Karki is not a nom de plume for someone else, I found, but a writer for the North Star Writers Group, who have this to say about themselves:

"The North Star National launched on September 14, 2009 – the logical outgrowth of the North Star Writers Group syndicate, which began serving American newspapers with opinion and feature material in December 2005.

Our mission is to bring American readers the latest, most thought-provoking news, opinion and features, as it happens.

We are also committed to rising above the trend that seems to pigeonhole most online media into one ideological camp or another. Among our writers are conservatives, liberals and those who defy labeling. All are upfront about their biases, as we find it quite silly for media to pretend they are truly “objective.” Everyone has opinions, and everyone’s opinions influence their news judgment to one degree or another.

The only difference between us and anyone else is that we’ll tell you about it upfront."

[Cicero]

No, I was just kidding about the Nom de Plume. Because he writes so well, and I hadn’t previously heard of him.

[Randy Larsen]

Palin has been attacked for 3 years now, Perry just got started!

What I’m seeing is a bunch of Perry supporters not liking the treatment that Palin supporters have dealt with since ‘08!

Grow up and fight like a girl, and no crying on FR!

[glock rocks]

That’s why she’s so hated – her refusal to step into their best-laid traps and fearlessness in directly calling Obama out make her every bit the existential threat to the establishment that Obama is to America. And let’s not forget the whole first female president thing, the gender card which trumps the race card that you know Obama will play hard if all else fails.

I'm just taking a guess here, but I surmise it will be easier for Obama-Holder to create the illusion (and eventual reality) of an existential threat by riling "their people" than any first female could by riling the fairer sex.

"All truth goes through three stages. First it is ridiculed. Then it is violently opposed. Finally, it is accepted as self-evident." — Schopenhauer

After the rats burn non-union Charlotte down, it'll be a different situation, and I do think that's their plan.

Remember '68? Yah, they want their new age "The whole world is watching" moment. These evil bastards will pull no punches, ask the new black panthers.

Support yer local sheriff folks. The weathermen whitehouse is doing their what-ifs right now, and they are have no concern for focus group acceptance. They're formulating their plan for taking the "sons of bitches out!" with the full corrupt force of the executive branch. In the culture of impunity of Washington, politics stops at corruption's edge. Almost all major corruption is either bipartisan or common enough that one side can effectively blackmail the other, so you can look for some level of support from players you haven't yet considered. And we can't discount the fifth column media, either.

... just sayin.

[RepublicanChick]

Palin ping!

[kara2008]

**Ping! - Excellent, spot on Palin article**

[TXnMA]

Get. Back. Under. Your. Bridge...