Posted on 02/07/2011 7:21:00 AM PST by pissant
No great surprise here, really; Palin has quietly backed the end of DADT and expressed support for conservative gays and lesbians in the past. Speaking here with David Brody from the Christian Broadcast Network and excerpted by Breitbart TV, Palin doesn’t endorse GOProud but does defend their attendance at CPAC, and argues that the value of events such as CPAC is to debate the issues and provide as much information as possible to attendees:
(Excerpt) Read more at hotair.com ...
If you didn't read her book, you have no place commenting on "her not understanding Conservative principles." You don't know jack.
I believe you. They’re in the majority there.
I don't buy into the conventional wisdom and I believe the study is not perfect.
I also don't buy into this notion that at some point in life one is without choices even if they were beaten or molested as a child. Sure, it scars them for life, but they do have a choice of going down the path of righteousness or not.
Spoken like a true elitist... PSYCHO, sounds like there's some 'liberal' in you...
I think she said above : “ No, we ‘shouldn't-not’ reach out to these homosexual ‘conservative’ groups ”. Catch the double negative she used to make it harder to follow. She wouldn't say-instead say “ We ‘should’ reach out to ... ” which would be easier to follow. This finally explains the silence on the newly passed Obama-RINO DADT.
The problem with these homosexual ‘conservatives’ is they are just liberals who want tax cuts. If someone is a 'Republican-first-er' it makes perfect sense to do this to get their votes, but I am not one.
If Sarah had stuck to Hannity's show she wouldnt get these questions.
Sadly, some conservatives still patronize RINOPAC. The event still has some political power.
ROFL
Agree, X2.
Homosexuals recruit. Who they look for are the lonely kids that have been abused. They are easy to “turn”. A kid will follow someone who is kind to them. Most of them have never heard of “righteousness”. These kids aren’t usually sunday school attendees.
I would say you had better take a closer look at your Icon first; There is a heck of a lot more Liberal in her than there is in me.......
In a matter of fact, PSYCHO is correct. Most of the “ignorant masses” generally reside in that media created moderate/centrist/squish/middle part of the political spectrum. They migrate to the overriding popular public opinion. They’re not free thinkers. They’re self-professed mavericks like John McCain.
their first line really gets me , it’s not based on anything but their agenda and view plus to try and bring down Sarah Palin.
Sadly we will see more of this type of stuff from the left and those in the establishment GOP especially neaer to the election.
hey really do fear for her as they know she will not go with the ivy league establishment she is for the average hard working, tax paying proud , pro military American and they hate that.
their first line really gets me , it’s not based on anything but their agenda and view plus to try and bring down Sarah Palin.
Sadly we will see more of this type of stuff from the left and those in the establishment GOP especially nearer to the election.
hey really do fear for her as they know she will not go with the ivy league establishment she is for the average hard working, tax paying proud , pro military American and they hate that.
But not just some "candidate that can win," though that's obviously a very important consideration.
The next president is going to face some very unpleasant situations, economically, in foreign policy, and quite probably militarily.
We need a candidate whose ability to grapple with and lead in those areas is not open to serious question; and you're right, none of the 2008 retreads are that sort of candidate.
So we have to look elsewhere; and we have to start making adult choices based on a realization that there's no such thing as a perfect candidate.
I personally believe that the economic situation is by far the most serious problem we face -- on its own merits, and because our economic problems are also a big player in our foreign policy and military positions.
For the other two, we need a clear and decisive mind at the helm -- somebody who can be trusted to think through and understand the consequences.
Somebody like Mitch Daniels would be good for the economic part, though I don't know about his foreign policy or military smarts. His unassuming demeanor could be a help or a hindrance, though I think it would be quite a refreshing change from the current circus of presidential politics.
Haley Barbour has a very good record: he has done well as governor of Mississippi; and his political acumen would be a huge asset in dealing with Congress.
I don't know who else there is ... Rick Perry, perhaps, though I think his Texas roots would be a liability, coming so soon after W. He's done pretty well, though.
What is even funnier is to see Palin haters like you defend the statist Mitt Romney and his fellow gaggle of gun-banning RINOs.
Actually, old boy, I'm a DeMint fan. You know, the guy who is actually way MORE conservative than Sarah Palin (e.g. DeMint doesn't support DADT, LOST, etc.)?
I won't vote for a damned one of them. I'll vote for Sarah, even if she is for the DADT repeal (SO AM I). I'll vote for Sarah, even if she approves of gay conservatives having a place at CPAC (you mean you oppose them taking part in the political system?).
Actually, yes, I DO oppose "conservatives" helping to legitimise the imposition of the radical gay agenda onto the American people. Essentially, what you're telling us here and now is that you're a fruity-toot leftie who is voting for Sarah Palin because of a fruity-toot leftie position that she's taking.
Not exactly a good reason for conservatives to support her, or for them to listen to you, old chap.
No weaseling needed, Palin hater.
What's ironic is that I actually published a pro-Palin article in my biweekly newsletter last week, so I can't be too much of a "Palin hater."
What is even funnier is to see Palin haters like you defend the statist Mitt Romney and his fellow gaggle of gun-banning RINOs.
Actually, old boy, I'm a DeMint fan. You know, the guy who is actually way MORE conservative than Sarah Palin (e.g. DeMint doesn't support LOST, gays in the military, etc.)?
I won't vote for a damned one of them. I'll vote for Sarah, even if she is for the DADT repeal (SO AM I). I'll vote for Sarah, even if she approves of gay conservatives having a place at CPAC (you mean you oppose them taking part in the political system?).
Actually, yes, I DO oppose "conservatives" helping to legitimise the imposition of the radical gay agenda onto the American people. Essentially, what you're telling us here and now is that you're a fruity-toot leftie who is voting for Sarah Palin because of a fruity-toot leftie position that she's taking.
Not exactly a good reason for conservatives to support her, or for them to listen to you, old chap.
No weaseling needed, Palin hater.
What's ironic is that I actually published a pro-Palin article in my biweekly newsletter last week, so I can't be too much of a "Palin hater."
Sadly we will see more of this type of stuff from the left and those in the establishment GOP especially nearer to the election.
Yes, and yes. They are employing Alinsky's "Rules for Radicals" full-bore. This one is Rule #4: "Make the enemy live up to their own book of rules" written or unwritten. They want to associate Palin with homosexuals, so conservatives will cast her out. I for one see through it.
Does she quit when things get rough? (The answer to that is yes.) That's all I need to know.......
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.