Posted on 07/06/2009 7:22:56 AM PDT by Behind Liberal Lines
[C]omparisons do a disservice to Reagan, who not only served two full terms as governor of California, but also spent decades studying the issues and immersing himself in conservative philosophy. His writings and radio commentaries make this abundantly clear. He proved people wrong because they objectively were wrong. This does not mean that whenever the media writes off or attacks a conservative politician that he or she is the next Reagan
****
to win and govern effectively you have to do more than "galvanize the party base" and "convince conservatives" -- you also have to convince independents and even some Democrats, as Reagan did [but] instead of going back to Alaska to gain more governing experience as many advised, Palin resigned after just two and a half years on the job. And there’s nothing to indicate that she has the slightest interest in boning up on policy. Honestly, what’s her incentive to study policy and do the boring task of governing? No matter what she does, her army of apologists will make excuses for her and lash out at those who dare to criticize her by accusing them of being liberal elitists who are threatened by her sheer awesomeness....
[N]one of this really matters if Palin intends to leave elective politics and become some sort of television or radio personality. My comments are only meant as a response to those who are still seriously suggesting her as a potential presidential candidate. Last October, an ABC/Washington Post poll found that only 35 percent of Americans thought Palin was qualified enough to be president, yet now her boosters expect us to believe that an additional nine months in office is all she needed to assauge Americans' concerns, allowing her to resign and prepare for a presidential run.
(Excerpt) Read more at spectator.org ...
I won't speculate on why you loathe her, (it's usually one or all of three things with bitter females), but your pathetic attempts to malign her will not succeed.
By the way, what would your opinion be of a person who was the head of a union and fought for that union's members against the heads or CEOs of a corporation, or even a movie studio? Why he would be just as awful as that braggadocio Palin, wouldn't he? Certainly not your kind of "populist".
You need AA.
Palin just quit her job representing the people of Alaska and you’re trying to make her into some conservative icon, the savior of the GOP and hero of America.
LOL Get real.
This enthusiasm for Palin reminds me of the enthusiasm for Fred Thompson. Some of us here were found saying that Fred had no chance whatsoever...and the usual response was “RINO loser” and so on.
I also remember the chorus from 2006 and 2008 of “the polls don’t matter” and “the polls are always wrong”.
Maybe this will end differently and maybe Sarah will do much better than Fred. Maybe she will cause 2010 to be a 1994...heaven knows, we need someone to do that before the country is completely socialized. Maybe the person to lead that charge is Sarah. But for folks here to be so condescending and self-righteous in their condemnation of those of us who are skeptical (and therefore a bit worried about the unimpeded march of Obamaism), that seems to be unhelpful to the cause.
It is far from absolutely self-evident that Sarah is going to mop up the floor in 2010 with the MSM and all the Dems. It could happen...but it is far from obvious.
To be fair Rockefeller was the one who said that they had to destroy Goldwater.
and we need to look for the most rightward candidate possible who can also - realistically - appeal simultaneously to a far greater subset of voters than Freepers & one who at least has a chance of crossing the finish line in a general election.”
Buckley (RIP) often said this. He said he supports the candidate who is furthest to the right who has a chance to win. That is pretty good wisdom.
(Oh, wait...all too many here will say that Buckley was a miserable compromising RINO loser...)
Now where would this scaredy cat liberal get that idea about Palinbots? ;)
I don’t really know how thickly Palin has been studying conservative issues and neither does this guy. We are going to find out soon. He’s right that she can not just play the part of a cheerleader for her fans/the base and then expect to be moved onto the football field as the quarterback. She has to demonstrate some real substance on all National issues. She might have it; she might not. I hope she does!
I know one thing; Romney has shown his socialist spots and I am not voting for him. Let the 20% of moderates (Rinos) vote for Romney.
feel free to review my posting history here. I am no Troll. You are the one making all the milquetoast self loathing posts. You are on multiple threads with your panty waist nonsense.
You are a Reagan Man alright! Ron Reagan (the son)
otherwise both of you will spend some time in the cooler.
But the weakness and will to sellout to a media selected RINO is astounding.”
*****
Exactly. You find a true conservative who isn’t a beltway type and they’re suddenly too ignorant to find their way out of a dimly lit room. The LSM has done their job well.
Reagan faced these same charges of being a dimwit both from outside and within the party.
Amazing how this dolt was just recently able to close the deal with Exxon Mobil on one of the largest and most important energy infrastructure projects in history in an extremely difficult environment. Two months ago no one gave her any chance at all of getting this done with private money.
I suppose being an idiot has its advantages. /s
I think the mods will find I have no history of insulting, demeaning, or liberal posts. Please stop with the non sensical attacks.
cool it, or else...
Some people are easily baffled. Not Sarah's fault. More like a personal problem.
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.