I heard someone on the radio the other day state she may be the next Opray Winfrey - I think it would be awesome if she did become a famous TV personality. I agree with her politics, I enjoy her, but I honestly don’t feel it would be beneficial to America to have her as the next President. For right or wrong, she is very divisive and we need someone who will be a strong leader without driving away those who are actually looking for someone other than Obummer as 2012 draws closer. We need to let the candidates get out together on the circuit and prove who they are (whether that can happen is suspect due to the media’s willful intent to choose whom THEY want to run). I personally would love to see Paul Ryan run as I feel he has those qualities that would best help us conservatives AND he is strong on budgetary responsibility. Whoever wins the nomination ought to put Sarah front and center as their press person (it would drive the libs NUTS!) I do not doubt that her role is important to conservatives, but honestly do not feel it will be in the Presidential ring myself.
No. The press has made her a dividing point and NO Republicans have the cahones to speak up. Republicans will NOT fight back. They do NOT defend their own which is the whole point of this vanity. They didn't even defend average Americans known as the Tea Party.
I respectfully and completely disagree.
She is a conservative, espousing values I and most American's hold in their heart.
As a result of her principled stance, she is relentlessly attacked and villified on all sides.
Backing elitist leaders in both parties has lead this Country to the brink of abandoning our Constitution.
If my candidate is not causing derranged behavior in the elitist ranks, there is something wrong with them.
Regards, Eddie01
You're repeating propaganda.
Give an example of her "divisiveness".
She is exactly what the country needs, and at this particular point in history.
Moderates of any flavor or labeling do not usually win in Crisis Eras. We are in a Crisis Era, which is a once per natural century, or once per lifetime, generational period that almost always includes a major economic crisis coupled with a major war (such as a world war or civil war), such that the overall shape and direction of the nation (or nations) is undeniably altered.
Devisiveness is the order of the day. We will either follow an authoritarian path, with the communist left, into into the abyss of a New Dark Age; or we will follow a pro-Freedom, pro-Constitution leader into another century of continuing relative freedom and relative prosperity.
You cannot "moderately" fight a wildfire that is consuming you and everything around you, as well as consuming every other place and thing to which you might flee for safety.
Follow a "moderate" leader, or pursue a "moderate" path, and you will lose everything. Follow the authoritarian path, and you will forfeit your rights to life, liberty, and property.
In which of these previous Fourth Turnings in History would you have preferred to have been on the "moderate" or "losing" side?