Palin supports McCain '100 percent' [Palin pushes back at TMZ 'disprespect' meme]

Politico ^ | Dec. 16, 2009 | Mike Allen

[Al B.]

Declaring that she “was honored and proud to run with him,” former Alaska governor Sarah Palin pushed back hard Wednesday against a report that she had disrespected Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) by blacking out his name on a sun visor she wore on vacation.

The website TMZ accused Palin of “a frontal attack on Sen. John McCain” during a Hawaii vacation this week: “Sarah chose to wear a visor from her campaign -- a visor that was emblazoned with the former presidential candidate's name ... that is, until Palin redacted McCain's name with a black marker.”

But Palin said in a statement to POLITICO that she was just trying to “be incognito” -- to go unrecognized and shield her children and husband, Todd, from paparazzi.

The hotel where she was staying had to chase away five photographers, a friend said.

Palin said in the statement to POLITICO: “I am so sorry if people took this silly incident the wrong way. I adore John McCain, support him 100 percent and will do everything I can to support his reelection. As everyone knows, I was honored and proud to run with him. And Todd and I were with him in D.C. just a week ago. So much for trying to be incognito."

The Palins were taking a break from a three-and-a-half-week book tour for her million-copy-selling memoir, “Going Rogue: An American Life.” Palin has signed more than 59,000 books -- an average of 1,750 per stop -- and has traveled more than 19,000 miles by plane and bus. She has spent 115 hours -- or 4.8 days -- signing books in 33 cities in 25 states. Her stops have included five military bases.

[stephenjohnbanker]

“Rab’s, myself and others sense she may be another big government compassionate conservative. My thought is: “What do the Palin worshippers think of the GWB legacy?” and “How would you demand she do things different than GWB as president?” If the answer is they think GWB was a big success, then it’s time to ring the fire alarms.”

You nailed it.

[stephenjohnbanker]

Sarah at John McCain.com........

“Palin is complimentary of McCain in the book: “John was a maverick, and he said he had picked me because in many ways I’m wired the same. … I was proud of the senator. … He didn’t go with a conventional, safer pick. John believed in change, the power of independent and committed individuals, the power of women.””

[roamer_1]

Could you do a series of posts on her record ( I assume in Alaska) that document the details of this ? [...] That would be useful and stir a needed debate here.

It would be useful in them to define the principles of conservatism she is violating. There are so many contrary views of conservatism here now.

I have done so (on both counts) over and over again. It doesn't matter. They'll hear none of it. They close their eyes, plug their ears, and scream la,la,la,la,la,la,la,la!

It is the nature of hero worship. There will be no debate, because her positions are indefensible. There will only be more rancor.

While I don't particularly mind that, I am not here as much as I would like, and am subject to long and unexpected absences... That's why I don't post threads very often. So I don't think I'm the guy to do a truth-file on her.

But my original declaration on these threads still applies:

I will happily defend against her based upon her own record in regard to the 3 pillars of Conservatism... and I will take on all comers. So far, no one has been able to make a cogent argument in her defense... just a bunch of poo-throwing... Similar in kind to the posts in this thread against her detractors.

[CedarDave]

Even if she didn’t come out publicly and endorse him, everyone would pretty much know how she stands. She states so clearly in her book. Do I agree with it, of course not, but what can ya do, she’s loyal to the guy. Even when he and his hired goons treat her like crap she still supports him.

I give her a pass and thank McCain for selecting her for his VP candidate. Without her being selected, she would still be something of a very, very long shot for consideration as a presidential candidate, if at all. And we would be stuck with the selection in 2012 with the Huckster, Romney, Pawlenty and maybe a few lessor known possibilities.

She's able to separate the man from his "hired goons" (no matter what his putting up with them might say about his decision making) and she is not about to chuck him over the side to climb the political ladder, as so many other politicians have done in the name of expediency (an example here in NM is when Richardson dissed and ditched the Clinton's to support Obama). I admire her for sticking by him even if he is a RINO. loyalty counts a lot in my book and it shows her integrity even though it may tick off some of her more rabid supporters. Even if she is not selected to run in 2012, she has shaken up the political landscape for the better, no doubt about that.

[roamer_1]

Could you do a series of posts on her record ( I assume in Alaska) that document the details of this ? [...] That would be useful and stir a needed debate here.

It would be useful in them to define the principles of conservatism she is violating. There are so many contrary views of conservatism here now.

I have done so (on both counts) over and over again. It doesn't matter. They'll hear none of it. They close their eyes, plug their ears, and scream la,la,la,la,la,la,la,la!

It is the nature of hero worship. There will be no debate, because her positions are indefensible. There will only be more rancor.

While I don't particularly mind that, I am not here as much as I would like, and am subject to long and unexpected absences... That's why I don't post threads very often. So I don't think I'm the guy to do a truth-file on her.

But my original declaration on these threads still applies:

I will happily defend against her based upon her own record in regard to the 3 pillars of Conservatism... and I will take on all comers. So far, no one has been able to make a cogent argument in her defense... just a bunch of poo-throwing... Similar in kind to the posts in this thread against her detractors.

[mkjessup]

It seems to me that everyone who is a real conservative (here on FR and elsewhere) will agree that the GOP nominee for 2012
MUST be a true conservative with proven credentials which would pass muster with Reagan himself. The survival of America and the re-establishment of our Constitutional Republic demands it.

That said, any candidate proclaiming that they are a conservative, but condones, supports or believes that either of the two RINOs George W. Bush or John Sidney McCain were truly conservative is NOT a conservative themselves, and cannot be trusted with the nomination of the Republican Party, let alone trusted with the White House and the fate our Nation.

I don't care who it is that says that George W. Bush was a 'conservative', if they believe that crap they need to give their head a shake and wake up whatever neurons are still alive in there. If someone actually thinks that John McCain is a 'conservative' and worthy of their respect and support, they too are untrustworthy and undeserving of the support of conservatives because such an individual clearly lacks the vision and comprehension to understand that McCain is nothing but an opportunistic, liberal piece of sh*t that chooses political expediency over principles every time, and pisses on conservatives every chance he gets.

ANY candidate who panders to, or reveals themselves to be an ally of the '*Kennedy Wing of the Republican Party' (* thank you former Congressman Duncan Hunter) is worthy only of our scorn and contempt.

[CedarDave]

So, in all honesty, I don't see how she would campaign for McCain.

Actually, if she did, she would outdraw him at every stop. I don't think McCain would allow that. She may however, make a political commercial for him that would follow along the same lines as the issues outlined during the campaign.

[sickoflibs]

RE :”That said, any candidate proclaiming that they are a conservative, but condones, supports or believes that either of the two RINOs George W. Bush or John Sidney McCain were truly conservative is NOT a conservative themselves, and cannot be trusted with the nomination of the Republican Party, let alone trusted with the White House and the fate our Nation.”

Here-Here! They dont have to dis them by name(being party leadership realities) , but they must call our their failed policies so we know what they are talking about.

[Landru]

"Rab’s, myself and others sense she may be another big government compassionate conservative."

We have no say until an election, my friend.
Whatever she is or isn't, whoever does or doesn't follow her is what we'll see up close & personal soon enough. BTW, I don't portend to get it, but, some people need other people to worship. Just the way it is and always has been.

"My thought is: 'What do the Palin worshippers think of the GWB legacy?'"

Moot.

"...and 'How would you demand she do things different than GWB as president?'

Very legit question, my friend.

I'm thinking by the time [that] question's asked? All attention will be focused on ridding the republic of zerO & his Wookie. Not Palin or FTM the other poseurs Huckster & the guy from MA with greasy hair. Watch.

"If the answer is they think GWB was a big success, then it’s time to ring the fire alarms."

Agree, but, don't think it'll go down quite like that.
Far too many --just like us-- are no longer seeking, we're DEMANDING a leader with substance, vision & a plan for a workable future.

An enormous constituency's pretty damned tired of bullshit promises that're in reality & for whatever reason(s), lies. Sick-to-death.

Palin senses the anger, will address it forthwith.

[stephenjohnbanker]

“It seems to me that everyone who is a real conservative (here on FR and elsewhere) will agree that the GOP nominee for 2012
MUST be a true conservative with proven credentials which would pass muster with Reagan himself. The survival of America and the re-establishment of our Constitutional Republic demands it.

That said, any candidate proclaiming that they are a conservative, but condones, supports or believes that either of the two RINOs George W. Bush or John Sidney McCain were truly conservative is NOT a conservative themselves, and cannot be trusted with the nomination of the Republican Party, let alone trusted with the White House and the fate our Nation.”

Thank you, sir.

[jla]

To 288 - The correct acclamation is hear, hear!. Perhaps illiterates shouldn't be trusted with the right to vote?

Some of the anti-Palin posts submitted to this thread are really not surprising, or unexpected. Reagan himself has been maligned here by FR's self-annointed 'solons'.

[Balding_Eagle]

Then she should have no problem repudiating her earlier statements, if she doesn't actually believe in them.

Yet she hasn't.

She essentially has, I forget who was interviewing her a couple of weeks ago.

I was concerned myself, but that interview gave some assurance that when she expounds on the illegals problem (my guess she'll do that in spring) that it will be finally and solidly settled.

Then her detractors will again have to move the goalposts. I would think they would have tired of doing that already, but I guess the devil never rests.

[captbarney]

Read the book- nothing but praise for McCain- many times

[mick]

Hi Al!

Well said. My thoughts excactly !! Which is why we love her. She is a woman of principle. People can get carried away with trying to make everything political. McCain is a tired old fool and I will do everything I can to defeat him in the primary.....but she will be doing the right thing to support him if that is her decision. As you said, it is a matter of honor!

Hope you and yours have a wonderful Christmas.

[Lakeshark]

Hey, come join the party, you should see the nit pick crap that is being said here, it’ll make your day.........

[Al B.]

How about something neutral like, he has been a dedicated Senator for many years. We fought the good battle as a team last year. People should give John consideration for re-election next year. He deserves that.

That's an equivocating statement. Sarah Palin is not an equivocator. The day she becomes one is the day I start questioning my support of her.

[Lakeshark]

Then her detractors will again have to move the goalposts

Which they are doing. The 1% crowd is going to make sure we have Obambi and the dems forever. I think some of them are Mobeys, here to piss and moan and convince us to put our energy behind some nut job they think is pure who can't even draw 1% of the vote.

[rabscuttle385]

Well, the McCain camp certainly thinks so. They've posted it on the JohnMcCain.com website

Well then.

EPIC FAIL

on the part of Sarah Palin.

[Al B.]

ANY candidate who panders to, or reveals themselves to be an ally of the '*Kennedy Wing of the Republican Party' (* thank you former Congressman Duncan Hunter) is worthy only of our scorn and contempt.

Would you have applied the same standard to Ronald Reagan when he picked Richard Schweiker for his VP in 1976? When he campaigned for Gerald Ford? When he campaigned for Pete Wilson?

[Lakeshark]

Oh come on, you know Reagan was a RINO...........

:-)