Freepers who want Sarah Palin to be President in 2012. Please all other stay out

[factmart]

This thread is only for freepers who want Sarah Palin to be President in 2012. Please all (TROLLS)other stay out.

[jimbo123]

Mitt Romney will not be the nominee. Your PDS will not change that fact.

[MarineBrat]

Isn’t that how Uberman referred to Jim?

Yes, it's JimRob's media code name. A sign of PMSNBC's famed homework division.

[DeadFurrow]

She speaks the truth and she speaks for me. I had the great pleasure, to vote, both times for Reagan. One, of my goals, in life is, to witness, her serving two terms as our President. DF

[streetpreacher]

http://nymag.com/news/politics/69130/index1.html

2012: How Sarah Barracuda Becomes President

“The unpredictability and the peril would increase exponentially with Palin in the mix. This scenario might seem bizarre, but we live in bizarre times. At a moment like the present—when American politics is wildly polarized and unstable, populist fervor has gripped the right and left, and the economy continues to flatline—it’s worth contemplating how much weirder things might get in 2012, and whether that weirdness could be so extreme as to make the unthinkable thinkable.

To wit: President Palin, anyone?”

“In a normal presidential cycle, Romney would be the clear Republican front-runner. His operation is top-notch. His PAC raked in $5.1 million in the first three quarters of the year, more than any other prospective candidate. And since he finished as runner-up to John McCain in 2008, it is, as they say, his turn—a quality that usually matters hugely in a party that has long operated in accord with the principle of primogeniture. Yet, for all of his dogged efforts, Romney has failed to solidify his status as the man to beat. A recent NBC News–Wall Street Journal poll found that his favorability among conservative voters is just 30 percent.

The reasons are myriad, but paramount among them is his role in enacting a health-care law in Massachusetts that bears a striking similarity to the controversial (and loathed on the right) federal overhaul that Democrats passed this year. Scott Reed, who ran Bob Dole’s campaign in 1996, argues that Obamacare in 2012 will be “what Iraq was to the Democrats last time, the defining issue and a fault line in the party”—one that may well prove as harmful to Romney as Hillary Clinton’s vote authorizing the war was to her in 2008. Grover Norquist, head of Americans for Tax Reform, likens Romney’s history on health care to “a boat anchor attached to his leg,” which he needs to get rid of “or [his candidacy] doesn’t work.” Can he do it? “Yeah, just explain it was the crystal meth,” Norquist cracks.”

Romney, the RINO establishment and the Left are going into cardiac arrest at the thought of this...

[hole_n_one]

Clue:

What is spelled WHAT, not want.

From the original post.............

Oh want a night when Reagan was elected, how proud it was to be American

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

WOW. Oh want A Night!! It will be the Happiest I have ever been on a election night!/

You kinda missed the whole point behind my editing of the lyrics.

Wake up, sleepy head!

[SoConPubbie]

Oh really? Where does she stand on Cap and Trade?

She is completely against Cap and Trade.

Go to the 10:00 minute mark in the video to here DENOUNCE cap and trade.

And before you deceitfully bring up her stated position FOR cap-n-trade WHILE she was a VP candidate for John McCain, let us all remember the context;

She was the VP for John McCain who was a whole-hearted believer in Man-Made Global Warming and Cap-N-Trade.

As any person who has any knowledge of the history of Presidential Politics understands, the VP must agree to promote the positions of the POTUS candidate.

So VPs have to balance their position on the issues and priorities they personally put on those positions with the stated positions of the POTUS candidate.

Context is King indylindy!

She Made these statements on July 8th, 2010.

Now, if you can provide a link to any comments she has made since she staked out her position AGAINST cap-n-trade where she has changed her position or waffled, you may have a point and I will be willing to listen.

You won't be able to find anything.

IndyLindy and Rob777, you should probably do your homework before you post.

Your PDS is showing again!

[rob777]

She was on record as supporting Cap and Trade back in 2007. She is now on record as being against it as of 2009.


She also supported in in the 2008 VP debate. Given that the idea has become VERY unpopular with the public, I am as skeptical of this "conversion" as I would be if Romney suddenly came out with strong statements against health care mandates. The problem is that she has never repudiated her earlier stand. Here is a a quote from a December 2009 Washington Post piece she wrote: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/story/2009/12/08/ST2009120803542.html?sid=ST2009120803542

"That's not to say I deny the reality of some changes in climate -- far from it. I saw the impact of changing weather patterns firsthand while serving as governor of our only Arctic state. I was one of the first governors to create a subcabinet to deal specifically with the issue and to recommend common-sense policies to respond to the coastal erosion, thawing permafrost and retreating sea ice that affect Alaska's communities and infrastructure."

From the same article: "But while we recognize the occurrence of these natural, cyclical environmental trends, we can't say with assurance that man's activities cause weather changes. We can say, however, that any potential benefits of proposed emissions reduction policies are far outweighed by their economic costs."

No, we cannot say that "any potential benefits of proposed emissions reduction policies are far outweighed by their economic costs". First of all, CO2 is NOT a pollutant. CO is but not CO2. Secondly, "policies" aimed at CO2 emissions do far more harm than good.

[algernonpj]

Have you mentioned who you support, perhaps?

LOL - facts are facts - so change the topic eh?

[streetpreacher]

Really? Was that Facebook group started by Miss Marple?

[SoConPubbie]

So she was for it before she was against it?

I got it.

So, she finds out the data has been fudged and changes her position on the issue and all you have to say is some JackAss statement like that?

What are you, 14?

[editor-surveyor]

I think that the first ‘want’ was just a fat-finger job.
(I could be wrong...)

[Cringing Negativism Network]

So no then, you have not mentioned who you support?

Didn’t suppose you had.

Mitt or Huck. Fess up. You’re so obvious about it.

[dselig]

Sneak Peek: Meet the Extended Family on Tomorrow Night’s ‘Sarah Palin’s Alaska’
by Lorie Byrd

This week Sarah Palin’s Alaska is all about family and fish. The Palins visit Todd’s family in Dillingham and at a fish camp in Ekuk. And they do a lot of fishing. Sarah and Todd’s son Track is back from Iraq and eager to make money following in his father’s fishing footsteps. But first he has to prove to his father that he can be the next of the great Palin fishermen.

In addition to watching Track catch fish (or not catch fish), Todd’s Eskimo grandmother, Lena, teaches Willow and the other girls in the family how to process the fish properly. Willow describes the scene as being covered in blood (and fish guts) and says she doesn’t think any of her friends do this. She is a good sport though and pretty good at it.

Later at the fish camp in Ekuk, after learning to process salmon for smoking, Piper says “I think I’m the best fish fileter in the whole third grade.”

The episode shows the Palin side of the family (5 generations) and what a big part of their lives fishing is. Willow celebrates her sweet sixteen birthday with a family party at her great grandmother’s house. The most powerful moments in the episode though focus on Trig and his teenage cousin Matthew who both have Down syndrome.

Sarah chokes up and tears up (and so did I) when talking about her visit with Matthew because it gives her a look at Trig in ten years. She says she hopes that Trig will be embraced by others and treated just like the other kids and talks about how Trig is the heart of her family and how much he teaches them all. This is an emotional side of Sarah Palin that her fans have not seen — at least not to this extent.

This is the most “real” of the episodes so far. The family is not fishing with brown bears or climbing mountains or visiting a commercial fishing operation. They are hanging out with family, fishing on their own boat with their own nets the way they supported their family for many years. They are visiting cousins and working alongside them in the fish camp. This shows the background of hard work and family that shapes Todd and Sarah Palin’s world view. http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/lbyrd/2010/11/27/sneak-peek-meet-the-extended-family-on-tomorrow-nights-sarah-palins-alaska/

[hole_n_one]

If it's occurrence had just been once, I would have ignored it.

Twice, well I just couldn't help myself!

I trust everybody knows the FRiendly spirit it was done in.

[streetpreacher]

That was actually quite witty. But not quite nearly as erudite as OhioWfan or myself.

[ohioWfan]

HA! I don't know who started it, but Miss Marple is certainly qualified to belong to the group. She's even eruditer than I am! (And a good judge of character as well!)

Actually, one of my high IQ sons is part of the there-their-they're FB group and I joined because I saw it on his page. (I taught him good grammar. :)

btw, are we off topic??

[SoConPubbie]

Governor Sarah Palin's letter to Senators Lisa Murkowski and Ted Stevens in support of the Law of the Sea Treaty, on official letterhead

Gee EV, do your research before you post!

She is completely against Cap and Trade. and see here -> The 'Cap And Tax' Dead End

Go to the 10:00 minute mark in the first link/video to see her DENOUNCE cap and trade.

And before you deceitfully bring up her stated position FOR cap-n-trade WHILE she was a VP candidate for John McCain, let us all remember the context;

She was the VP for John McCain who was a whole-hearted believer in Man-Made Global Warming and Cap-N-Trade.

As any person who has any knowledge of the history of Presidential Politics understands, the VP must agree to promote the positions of the POTUS candidate.

So VPs have to balance their position on the issues and priorities they personally put on those positions with the stated positions of the POTUS candidate.

Context is King EternalVigilance!

She Made these statements on July 8th, 2010 and the editorial was released by the Washington Post on July 14th, 2010.

Now, if you can provide a link to any comments she has made since she staked out her position AGAINST cap-n-trade where she has changed her position or waffled, you may have a point and I will be willing to listen.

You won't be able to find anything.

Eternal Vigilance, you should probably do your homework before you post.

Your PDS is showing again!

[jimbo123]

Looks like algernonpj has outed himself as a Buchananite! I thought they were extinct.

[Cringing Negativism Network]

HEY.

I like Buchanan. :)

[streetpreacher]

From the same article: "But while we recognize the occurrence of these natural, cyclical environmental trends, we can't say with assurance that man's activities cause weather changes. We can say, however, that any potential benefits of proposed emissions reduction policies are far outweighed by their economic costs."

No, we cannot say that "any potential benefits of proposed emissions reduction policies are far outweighed by their economic costs". First of all, CO2 is NOT a pollutant. CO is but not CO2. Secondly, "policies" aimed at CO2 emissions do far more harm than good.

Are you intellectually stunted? She is arguing against "emission reduction policies" here.