Posted on 09/16/2011 7:06:43 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
Exactly this is usually the GOP candidate’s advantage. The press refused to allow a vetting of Obama the last time, but that was an exception not the rule yet, I think.
If she wasnt married, then whats the big deal who she slept with anyways?
And the left is a bunch of hypocrics. They sound like KKK people. ‘keep your hands off the white woman boy.Dont you know your place,boy”?
I dont know, or do I have the desire to know,what this scumbag wrote. The “writer” of this book seems like a spurned high schooler who writes nasty things about a girl who shot him down for the prom.
George Washington?
Sorry—I shouldn’t be posting in the middle of the night!
Good point!
That would be an epic topic in a debate between Obama and Palin.
Obama: "And the incident where you had sex with a black man..."
Palin: "YOUR MAMA!"
Epic.
Wapo sees that she is becoming a victim, we can’t have that, being a victim will lead to her winning. This whole business sickens me. Unfortunately she is still the only one with fire to get me, an Independent to the voting booth.
It tells us more about Bertelsmann.....
That is nonsense and you know it. Any time a conservative is slandered, we need to condemn it, whether or not we support that conservative as a candidate.
NOT ONE.
WHY NOT?
Ailes, Romney, FOX News, Perry are Gore-derived
Rovian-puppets with one purpose. guess what.
"Peeking Out From the McCain Wreckage: Mitt Romney"
"Someone's got to say it: IS MITT ROMNEY RESPONSIBLE FOR OBAMA'S VICTORY?"
"Vanity: Team Romney Sabotaged Palin and Continuing to Do So?"
Yes. It was meant to be a compliment. Lighten up.
Hey, Einstein! My statement had nothing to do with political affiliation, liberal, conservative, right of left. It's political strategy I'm talking about. I think you had that reply pre-written before you even read my comment. In fact, it just happened to be my comment you used it on. Didn't matter if the response was relevant to the comment.
The only person I came close to parroting in the statement Anybody who uses the term "PDS" (especially against other republicans) only confirms the statement that Sarah Palin is too "divisive" to win a general election. was Michael Reagan.
Again I say "You may want to rethink your usage of this term PDS" unless you know for sure Sarah Palin is not running in 2012. Unless you're on Mitt's side.
dirtboy, condemn it, prove it is false, etc. - great. In the general election it will be old hat and dealt with.
It is when we have uncontested primaries, where candidates are named by the establishment and there is no contested fight, that we get lame, greenhoused candidates that wilt under fire.
We are certain it is slander. Big deal. We will always have slander. This will be dealt with and put to rest.
“A curse without cause will not alight.”
Sarah believes in the Good Book’s words and so do I.
“No. Slinging mud under the pretense of “vetting” is unconscionable.”
Let me know when it is outlawed.
I don’t disagree with you that it is unconscionable, but that is irrelevant. The opposition will always act in an unconscionable way.
They’re demoncrats. It’s what they do.
Our choice is to pretend it doesn’t exist, or deal with it effectively - and to do that now or later.
I choose to deal with things now, before the general election.
Not if the spade is a potential voter and you're trying to get them to consider voting for your candidate.
Attacking the constituents instead of attacking the candidates in the race is something a liberal such as Pelosi or Hoffa would do. And it normally backfires.
I'll bet Sarah Palin would agree with me 100%. They (some of her 'supporters') are hurting her more than they are helping her.
Mit loves what they're doing.
There is so much there about 0bama and glaringly obvious the media doesn’t want to go there.
Prove it is false?
Apparently you are a moron who doesn't understand that you cannot prove a negative.
So my point stands. You are clueless.
...............................
"Apparently you are a moron who doesn't understand that you cannot prove a negative.
So my point stands. You are clueless."
...............................
Dirtboy,
Apparently you are a moron who doesn't understand sentence structure, language, logic, the word, "etc.", or politics.
So my sentence stands. You are clueless and seemingly ineducable.
You seen to want to continue in your ignorance. Carry on.
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.