Posted on 03/08/2010 9:42:11 AM PST by Sub-Driver
Edited on 03/08/2010 1:01:32 PM PST by Admin Moderator. [history]
I can agree with that.
Like you posted earlier, when Sarah says she likes McCain, it’s because she likes McCain.
People on both sides of the Sarah debate get wee wee’d up too much.
The quote in post 199 is correct. The quote in the original article IS NOT.
Yeah, I was saying...
The original quote is totally out of context with what is in post 199. It has already been corrected in numerous stories.
When I read this I just started laughing, seriously, she was FIVE YEARS OLD..unbelievable how far the left will stoop..she was five years old and went to Canada with her family to treat her brother. Just when you think these turds can’t sink any further they find new ways don’t they
Okay, good to know that... I just wanted to make sure... thanks...
I like your post... and I’m going to use that information... very good... :-)
I just read on C4P that the leftist idiots are already calling the hospital in Whitehorse trying to get medical records of Sarah’s brother..I knew they would go back to when she was in diapers to try to smear her. I bet Chris Matthews and his panel of “experts” discuss how Sarah at age five, came up with Death Panels
Thanks for the info... I appreciate it and we need to have it to counter many who are going to bring this one up...
LOL. ;-)
Did you say “unless there is some sort of “grand conspiracy across the entire MSM (who knows...)”?
LOL. You’re not series!
http://www.skagwaynews.com/051107GovPalinvisit.html
Look at the third paragraph down.
The quote attributed to her makes sense, and there’s nothing bad about it. Why do you want to assume that the news media is misreporting the quote? Palin could easily twitter if the quote was wrong, and she hasn’t.
Yes, the media twists her words, but that’s no reason to deny she said them, or to call her stupid for saying them.
I’m a Palin supporter, and I don’t know why you think she needs to “clarify her remarks”. They were perfectly acceptable remarks, and no clarification is needed.
Awwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww, what a cutie pie. Someone should also inform the leftist loons that Canada didn’t enact Socialized medicine til 1972, which was WAY after Sarah went there with her family
LOL. Youre not series!
Yes, I was serious... I wanted to know whether the quote in Post #199 was correct -- or -- if "this" was part of that "grand conspiracy" and thus that quote was also wrong... :-)
I agree, she doesn’t have to clarify anything. She was five years old, her brother needed medical attention, they went to Canada, big freakin deal.
I’d like the truth as well, but we will not get it from the MSM.
Was socialist medicine in Canada back in the 60’s?
Ah HA! This looks to be from her Idaho days. According to Idaho Fish and Wildlife Statute 694.1289 anyone fishing, including obtaining crawfish with bait or trap, must have a current fishing license prominantly displayed on their person. And look at that face - guilt written all over it!
Alternate headline: “Sarah Palin caught Topless!”
LOL ...
MOst of the negative attacks on Palin in this thread were from Palin supporters, denying she said the quote (which has now been confirmed as at least coming from a news source, and for which Palin hasn’t said it was wrong), or saying that she must not have said it because it would be stupid to say it.
Since it is just about confirmed that she did say it, they seem to be on record calling her stupid.
Meanwhile, some of us are trying to point out that the statement makes sense, that there is nothing bad about it, and that the interpretation of it by the left is what is wrong — of course, the interpretation of her comments by her supporters was just as wrong, and damaging.
Meanwhile, people who are just trying to help the deluded into realizing that Palin’s comments are not bad are being labeled “anti-Palin”, while those who deny she could have said them are being called her “true friends”.
Well, give me enemies over “true friends” who think denying my own words to me is helpful.
The original quote was fine. The headline lied about the quote.
The original ‘piece’ took the quote out of context, and the usual suspects ran with it. I never asked for clarification. People getting upset over what a 6 year old does with her parents is much ado about nothing.
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.