Posted on 09/17/2011 1:03:44 PM PDT by SamAdams76
If that is your first principle, you are no friend of liberty and no friend of the Constitution. roamer is right: this country needs a reboot.
"Defeat Candidate X" cannot ever be a first principle.
Junk like this, and most of the last 202 posts, is why I haven't posted in a Palin thread in months.
>>You mean like “she can’t win” as an example, right?
Corollary: Palin’s fans are strong minded, since it isn’t working on them.
Cheers!<<
I have pretty much stuck to “she won’t run” — predictions not platitudes.
Y cheers ustedes tambien! :)
I am not impressed with Perry as a true conservative, but he would be better than Obama.
First, I did not say I was impressed by Perry - What I said was that Perry was the closest thing to a Reagan (true) Conservative in the field, in that he possesses the record and ability to serve all conservative factions. It is the quality of that service that I would question, not the service itself. You may recall that I said that quality was not sufficient for me to vote for him.
As to his being better than Obama - What does that matter? A ham sandwich would be a better president that any of them, in that it, like a true Conservative, would be incapable of destroying any part of our Constitutional Republic, and would by nature be unable to subvert the Constitution itself. A ham sandwich would not sign away any sovereignty, and would by virtue of it's inanimate state, be guaranteed to sign no bill increasing spending, and would in fact, by that same nature, cut off all spending for it's entire term. By that predicted method, such a sandwich would be a federalist too, since the states would be forced to pick up the slack. That's one helluva lot more gravitas than we can expect from anyone in the current field.
And if you aren't casting a vote against Obama, you are wasting your civic duty to support and defend our country and its constitution.
That is a scurrilous and tiresome charge, which is wholly without merit. One who votes *for* Obama votes for Obama. All others lend him nothing, even those who vote 3rd party or object by abstention. In fact, abstaining from a vote for a lesser evil is more honorable, more principled, than the vote of expediency or popularity. Our fathers clearly desired our people to vote their conscience, knowing they will sleep well, having voted for the capable statesman whose honor and committed nature cause him to be worthy of the office.
And in withholding their votes, they better guarantee the next pass will be more to their liking, as the party who wishes to win will court them with a qualified suitor. Otherwise, they will always be faced with an unqualified field of suitors, and be faced with a whore's choice - even as we have right now.
I don't get the whole banana thing, but I will feel very good about sending Obama and his puppet masters into retirement.
I can say that if one replaces him with a globalist Republican, that good feeling will be short lived, and that within a very short while, you will certainly rue the day. What good to settle for a candidate who will grant general amnesty to illegal aliens, or sign the "Law of the Sea" treaty, or push forward the NAU, not to mention mere (however dire) finances?
So who is your candidate? Who is a true conservative, and can win the primaries and defeat Obama? Please, I'd love to find that person and get on board. We all would.
I currently support no candidate, though I am leaning heavily toward that ham sandwich. As it is now, *none of the above* are satisfactory (to include Palin, btw). If the criteria for a Conservative are met in a late comer, or third party (which will almost certainly happen), I will cast my vote there - else-wise I will concentrate on the down ticket.
Absolutely agree. That's why my first principle is to defeat Obama. It's the right thing to do. It's just my opinion based on my analysis.
LOL! While I appreciate the sentiment, that is not a principle at all. Principles are found in the founder's documents, the Judeo-Christian Ethic, the immovable basic 'first things' of the various conservative factions, and etc... Things to vote *for*. Yours is a vote of expediency if you will think about it.
I never asked for compromise. Maybe that's where you misunderstand me. Getting rid of Obama is job one at this point in America. He is the enemy coming over the wall. He and his little group are eroding our chances of ever rebuilding our country back to the founding fathers' vision.
I quite fervently disagree (all the way around). Obama is a declared enemy in the field. He is nowhere near as dangerous as the turncoats in our midst, who are already past the gate, and who speak in whispers to itching ears. Again, it is the lack of opposition that gives liberalism any foothold at all. And you do ask me to compromise - I vote in a principled manner, finding a candidate to vote *for*. 'ABO' flies directly in the face of that.
I also believe the Obama presidency is creating and fortifying conservatives all across this great country. This tipping point on which we find ourselves may prove to be a great moment for conservative Americans and for the country. We may well be thanking him like we thanked Carter for giving us President Reagan.
You may well be right - Obama is very comparable to Carter. But Reagan brought us the Bushes, and the eventual betrayal of the 94 congress. That is not Reagan's fault - but our own for becoming comfortable and eschewing vigilance... And in better than 20 years, the Conservative cause has seen very little advancement, and has suffered defeat and apathy at the hands of... (wait for it)... REPUBLICANS! Reaganism, with the exception of a small band of merry men in the House, left with Reagan. It is the populist vote and the vote of expedience which has wrought this bitter fruit. Baker necons dressed as 'conservatives' fooled us all for a while. But there is really no excuse. Let's endeavor to fill our elected houses with Conservatives this time, as we have no time left to lose.
Thanks, roamer. I look forward to reading more of your posts on other threads.
Likewise, and have a good day.
Maybe..maybe not. ROTFL! Snicker...:)~
Just as soon as you run FR, you can try telling me what to do. Until then, shut your mouth.
Any further explanation needed?
‘and we’ll have to find another candidate to support.’
The problem is that many of you Palin supporters have openly said that you don’t intend to support anyone else. And that means by staying home, you are indirectly voting for Obama...the next SCOTUS judge is too important to ‘stay home’. It is shallow and short sided.
What if we do..it's still a free county..or is it? :)
Augustine defined freedom, not as the power to do what you want, but the power to do what you should. Voting cannot and should not be legally enforced, but it is still an obligation, an act necessary to the preservation of our freedom. Abdication of a central duty of American citizenship is not how you preserve freedom for either your posterity or mine. Like Red Green says, “we’re all in this together.” Just sayin ...
“Sarah has become a caracature of herself and painfully buffoonery is not now too far off. -rita”
“I laugh every time I see these statements from the PDSers, herein. There may be less than air among their brains, or less than honor within their breasts.-WVKayaker”
Maybe I’m reading that wrong, but when did Rita’s breasts become part of this debate????
(All right, bad joke, but someone had to lighten the mood)
Okay, roamer, support your ham sandwich or vote third party or don't vote at all for president. That course may help you sleep at night, but it is not going to help the republic.
I believe we have a federal emergency, one that is unique in our history and will determine the future for the US and indeed the world.
You want to wait for the top surgeon to arrive before administering first aid. I want to stop the bleeding and give the country a fighting chance.
Totally agree. I was a candidate myself last year, briefly, and went through the sticker shock of what it takes to feed those folks. No wonder so many people get sucked into obligations other than their electoral constituency, and thus so often fall short of their duty to represent those who voted for them.
It's also one of the best arguments for why Palin really is running despite being grossly misunderstood by "industry professionals." She's bypassing those "professionals" with malice aforethought. She's using her grassroots support, the people who will actually vote for her, precisely because that way she remains free to fulfill her duty to represent them and always do the right thing ... for them. She's living her platform.
In fact, she made comments in one of the books that would have shed light on this to open-minded persons, but it has been widely overlooked due to the industry bias. I believe she was in the car with her family, not long into her term, and she commented that to get any sleep at night as politician, you'd have to be either corrupt or rich. She was just a hockey mom, and now she was for the first time seeing just how bad the political process had become.
BTW, that right there should give a clue why she has forged a unique combination of high income activity with candidate-like activity. That is a combination so off-template to the industry regulars it's creating mass confusion among them. Those who cannot think outside the current, corrupt process can only see the high income activity and the lack of genuflecting to industry “overlords” as an indication of insincerity, hence the pervasive belief within the industry she’s not really running.
But those of us without those expectations of "standard candidate behavior" are having a much easier time reading her as running, because the signal is clearly there, if you can get outside the box.
I completely agree with you.
Yep, free country to even exhibit stupidity. It seems to be quite the epidemic these days.
Great article
Well...if you are going to be stupid, do it in a grand way and quit messing around. JMHO.
and for the vermin major corporations (benefits of crony capitalism, tax-code games, lead-fullback-blocking by the government in their favor in the form of onerous and destructive regulation, etc. etc. etc), and other vested interests, to have their asses kicked into the next hemisphere, so that the "Washington-New York-Boston axis" does not poison the atmosphere merely to preserve their own gravy train at the cost of the Republic's very survival (survival=not being taken over by Muslims, African / South American immigrants, not being maneuvered into geopolitical or economic insignificance by the Saudis and / or the Red Chinese, not getting in a war, thermonuclear or otherwise, with China or Russia, not getting in a Nuclear War with a resurgent Caliphate, and restoring our lost Constitutional freedoms to what they once were).
Cheers!
Palin actually laid out her whole campaign strategy and blueprint for governing as President in Going Rogue, but few even of the Palin fans here on FR seem to have caught on.
(Limbaugh once said that with any "real" political book, the elite insiders don't actually READ the thing, that'd take too much time: they flip to the index to see where their name is mentioned, and read that section only...I guess they then look up a couple of reviews to see what the approved opinion on the book is supposed to be, so they can parrot THAT to show their own intellect and independence.)
Cheers! Cheers!
And Sarah hasn’t? No eriously, Reagan didn’t officially announce until “late”, and there was great speculation as to whether he would run. So thats not an answer.
Look, I know from working inside a campaign that there are many details that affect a wide variety of decisions. Not the least of which are personal decisions we the people will not know about until the Memoir’s come out years later.
Just because Sarah isn’t in the race yet, does not mean that she isn’t running for President in 2012. It means she hasn’t announced, and until at least one filing deadline passes, you cannot assume that she isn’t going to run. Well you can make the assumption if you want to, but you stand a pretty good chance of being wrong - given the nature of assumptions....
Good Lord! Yet another attack by one of the “Killer Palinistas.” AIEEEEE! Chomp! Chomp! Chomp!
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.