Posted on 12/16/2009 4:38:39 PM PST by 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.
(Excerpt) Read more at politico.com ...
I would hasten to point out that I was referring to civil libertarians, and not the Libertarian party. Most of the libertarian folks hereon are of that sort - strong defenders of limited government, the Constitution and the federalist system. Most are not associated with the Libertarian party.
As to these civil libertarians ("libertarians" from here on), I find myself aligned with them more often than not (in the 95% range), especially on domestic issues. Even on foreign policy, while we are not aligned, we can see each other, at the least. That is far more than I can say for the Baker Moderates in the Republican party (Bush I, Bush II, McCain, etc.), whom I abhor for their globalist desires.
And it is no wonder that I can agree with the libertarians. They are of Goldwater, I am of Reagan. Reagan, and modern Conservatism came from the Goldwater wing of the Republicans. They represent the conscience of Conservatism just as much as the social conservatives do -
In fact, as I have said many times, BOTH must be present to form a proper Conservative conscience. And neither can exist without the other. That, in a nutshell, is the magic of the Reagan coalition... Standing foremost upon the principles of civil libertarianism AND the Judeo-Christian ethic... And therefore, Reaganism cannot BE without the libertarians at the table. Those who rail against them do so at our peril.
As to Ron Paul, I agree with alot of what he says. I am greatly aligned with him on limited government, am sensibly protectionist (what used to be "Free Trade" before the globalists took the term), and while I disagree with him wrt the wars, I cannot disagree with the reason for his stance (foreign entanglements).
But, as a Reaganite, I could not support him, for the very same basic reason that I will not support Palin: The Reagan Coalition requires the basic unmovable principles of ALL the conservative factions to be respected. Ron Paul cannot harness all three of the pillars of Conservatism.
Regards.
While I don’t think she’s ready at this moment, I do think she could improve considerably by 2012, if she really put her mind to it.
There are ways to get up to speed if that’s your goal. If she doesn’t think she needs to improve that much, it’s going to hurt her.
I don’t necessarily think she needs to run for the Senate. She does need to spend a week in California’s elementary schools and emergency rooms and hospitals.
HA! Yeah, that's pretty much what it means, right there.
It's not unusual for a thread about one of our own GOPers to generate more negativity and animus than an Obama thread.
And I wasn't talking about you, DoughtyOne. I know you are a measured and well reasoned poster even when we disagree. My comment is more directed to the kids, or better yet, those with the childish mentality that seem to flock to any thread where something negative is posted about Sarah Palin. Has anyone called her a RINO yet? If they haven't, it's probably going to happen sooner rather than later.
I'm not opposed to expressing our dissatisfaction and telling Sarah when we don't think she is doing the right thing. I don't think she should support or campaign for McCain. McCain needs to go and Sarah should be aware of our opposition to McCain – no question about that. What I don't like is seeing the Sarah haters coming out of the woodwork and posting their nonsensical vanities designed to diminish Sarah and her supporters based on the latest media rumor.
post #74 by redpoll (I love his comments).
I can tell by your thoughtful list that you also want the very best for her. I hope your list and suggestions won't be misunderstood or considered condescending by anyone here because I know you've offered them in earnest and only with Sarah's best interests in mind. I'm pretty sure Sarah herself is giving serious thought to several items you listed and I hope she's thought about mastering debates. She blew Biden away on style, but not entirely on substance. I firmly believe she could have on substance too, but again, her "managers" didn't trust her.
You said, Who didn’t see Palin being asked about support for John McCain at some point. It was probably one of the most likely questions she was going to be asked, and I don’t believe this is evidence of her being ready.
D1, trouble is, she wasn't asked. She was asked about why she marked out his name on her cap. Thus far today, the issue isn't making the news. It may very well be much ado about nothing.
“I don’t necessarily think she needs to run for the Senate. She does need to spend a week in California’s elementary schools and emergency rooms and hospitals.”
And 500-600 barrios.
I hope not. Sarah has said she is going to campaign for conservatives. McCain isn't a reliable conservative, and he has aligned with the liberals too often. 2010 should be the year when conservatives take the House and the Senate, and I believe the time will be ripe for this to happen.
Obama's poll numbers are plummeting. Since he is an avowed commie, he won't stop his agenda of destruction against Americans and America, which guarantees his poll numbers will go down even further, thus making the come back of conservatism even stronger. That's why I think it would be a waste of time campaigning for someone whose time has passed. Why not giving the chance to a real conservative with more passion and energy to do the right thing for America?
Aaaargh. I had a feeling my comments to you would be misunderstood. SCP was referring to Ron Paul posters and posters she calls one percenter’s who flock to threads in groups to point out the short comings of Sarah Palin in particular. I keep it simple: I ignore those posters and they do not post me.
Yes, Ma'am. We've just now got enough snow for snowshoes... I am hoping to put them to use shortly. There is nothing like the South Fork of the Flathead River in the winter time. One cannot help but to be humble up there.
But you better bring a gun....we’re surrounded by armed Mexican drug cartels....illegal aliens, who ,according to some, deserve a ‘pathway to citizenship’.
Hmmm... I wonder what caliber is preferred for plinkin' drug cartels and wetbacks??? On second thought, mebbe you should come on up here. All we have to worry about is lions, wolves, bears, and mooses... :D
Hot coffee, sitting on the top of Sarah Peak... It's callin' me...
I wouldn’t be surprised if you and I saw this pretty much the same. I’m not as well able to discuss the Libertarian party vs the civil Libertarians, so I won’t try.
Where we (libertarians and I) share common ground, I don’t mind. My emphasis is on a return to limited federal government, and Constitutional governance. I’m not going to object to anyone who wishes to travel that road with me.
I can’t join the Libertarian party, so my emphasis is getting the Republican party or another to sign on to the values I support. Thus my support for the Tea Party folks.
A lot of folks don’t know what you mean by the Baker comments. I do, and I agree. The Free Trade issue that you touched on is important to me. This global downturn had one interesting effect didn’t it. It’s the one thing that could be a dent in China’s plans to become the global hegemon. And I still believe it only slowed the process.
The Baker boys didn’t seem to have a problem with that at all. That angered me something fierce. One day, we will face China straight up. Our kids will die due to the treachery I have seen. That’s been my premise since around 1993.
Whoever our next president is, they need to go to Washington with a meat cleaver. When about 90% of the infrastructure back there is rotting on the cutting room floor, we’ll be back on sound footing, and not a day before.
Just like I said to D1, aaaaaargh, at least you know I was not including you. “You betcha” we’ve had many good conversations and debates over the years, always with decorum, and mutual respect, and I see no reason why that should change, as long as your RINOs are my RINOs...lol.
BTW, the foreign entanglements issue is one that is important. I didn’t mean to gloss over it.
We live in a very small world today. We’re not traveling to some distant foreign land that doesn’t mean anything these days. People from those lands wind up in the U.S. on a daily basis at our airports.
So what do we do when attacked by terrorists? Well, we make those terrorists pay a very heavy price for having done so. I believe we have made them pay a very heavy price.
Folks said that Iraq wasn’t involved in 09/11, and was not an anti-American threat. Strangely enough, tens of thousands of terrorists disagreed enough to die on the soil of Iraq fighting our troops.
Look, Thomas Jefferson himself supported the War against the Barbary Pirates. There were foreign entanglements even in his day. And he joined in those efforts.
We either fight on foreign soil and project American values there, or we crawl back into our shell and allow another nation to become the world’s hegemon.
That’s just the sad, or not so sad, reality of it IMO.
Victoria, I believe Sarah’s comment was fairly straight up. I think it was a mistake and I have said so.
There is this dynamic around here at times, and I don’t necessarily think it’s either side’s fault. In fact I’d say most of us are on the same side, we’re just having a disagreement here.
At any rate, don’t you think that sometimes the defense of someone who has done something wrong, causes an exponentially larger amount of attention to be drawn to the mistake.
Seriously, don’t you think it would have been far better on this thread to just admit that the 100% comment was a mistake and move on? Instead we had people swoop in to ‘protect Sarah’, and all of a sudden it was a full highly visible defense/attack of Palin.
It should never have grown to what it did, a nearly 400 post thread. I think the defense of something that is wrong, is sometimes the worst thing a supporter can do.
How many people would have even seen this, if it had been acknowledged as a mistake, and we all could have moved on.
Thank you for your nice comments regarding my posts. I appreciate it. I appreciate your willingness to discuss the matter calmly too.
Works for me, and Merry Christmas to yoo!
Then you have absolutely NO business coming onto this forum and criticizing her based upon your willful ignorance of the facts.
Well said sir.
Right now Republicans sole theme is “We oppose democrats”. And it's working great too. They make great ‘opposition’ when in the minority and out of the White House.
But suppose many here had their dreams come true and Palin becomes a candidate in 2011 for 2012. So the theme would be “Vote for me to oppose Democrats for four years” ? I dont buy it!
Presidents always promise :1) to do big things, 2) the big things wont cost any voters anything
I need to get an idea what those 'big things' will be before I commit again.
Now let me ask you this: is she going to campaign for McCain, or did she just say some kind words because she feels she owes McCain something and should say something nice about him? True, she has contributed to his campaign as well as she has contributed to Hoffman's and Bachman's campaigns, and some other campaigns also.
We don't know if she really meant what she said or if she is going to take further steps to help McCain get re-elected, and because of that, I wasn't going to declare she made a mistake when no one is sure how strong her commitment is to a McCain victory in 2010.
I guess we'll find out if she made a mistake if she campaigns for him. Saying a few nice words in the political world is not in itself anything rare or unusual.
I love discussing this with you too, because you are the kind of poster who doesn't blow his top and call me RINO or something similar, and we are able to discuss the facts of the case.
Be back a bit later. Going out for lunch.
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.