Posted on 09/07/2011 10:18:27 AM PDT by Lakeshark
It is even worse than that. If she has decided to run and has not informed Fox News of that fact, knowing that they have a policy of suspending or terminating commentators that are running for public office, then she is taking money from them under false pretenses. That is dishonest and unethical.
So the choices appear to be a) she is indecisive and and can't make up her mind; b) she has decided not to run, but has not told her supporters in order to stay in limelight; or c) she has decided to run, but has kept it to herself so as to keep getting her $1M/yr salary until the very last minute. Indecisive, unethical or dishonest? You decide.
“She has good reasons for waiting. “
Not really. You gave excuses, not reasons.
Leaders go first.
” .... hard won campaign funds and perhaps run out too soon.”
- Underfunded? Well, she should announce earlier and work at raising more money.
“Another reason(legit)is because she simply doesn’t want to frickin’ announce yet. “
Fine, but that’s not the stuff Presidents are made of.
See #82. At this point, it doesnt matter.
It was a hit piece, pure and simple. And YOU would not be defending him if it had been about perry or perry supporters who are just as enthused about THEIR candidate as we are about ours. To deny this is to deny the obvious.
We get away with lot of stuff here on FR because most of us have posted with, to, for, and against each other for a LONG TIME. We snipe at each other on one thread and agree with each other on another.
Anyone who thinks politics is a friendly sport is out of their mind. And we pretty much prove it every day. But when we need to, we know that this is the mother ship and we will not abandon it because we disagree SOMETIMES.
So our friend erick prolly reads this forum and thinks we act like this in the real world, when the truth is, MOST of us are friends.
YOU know it, I know it, and if he doesn’t, that is HIS loss, not ours.
You old Teufel, you.
He may not be a liberal but he is more of a republican than he is a Conservative... and he is WRONG!
LLS
When you select a presidential candidate to support, you have to look at the people who surround them, because these are the kinds of people who will be in the policy-making and administrative positions. If the Palinistas here are representative of the people that would be around Sarah, count me out. They are petty, vindictive, rude and dishonest - not exactly what I want to see in any administration.
PerryKrishnas. All of them.
They go around to every thread about another candidate just to trash that candidate, and they threaten to have a poster banned if they dare come onto a Perry thread and say anything negative about him. They truly behave in a cultish fashion. They can't just support their candidate and try to persuade you why he would be the right choice - they try to destroy any opposing candidates and any of their supporters. Instead of broadening Perry's appeal, they are chasing away the very people they would need to support him if he won the nomination.
So, sadly, I have now gone from the point where, while I didn't think Rick was the best choice this cycle and I didn't think he could win, but I would support him if he got the nomination; to where I will actively oppose his nomination, and if he wins the nomination I will sit the election out. And it is because I don't want his supporters anywhere near the levers of power. If this is the type of supporter he inspires, then that says a lot of negative things about his candidacy as well.
Not unlike a governor running for reelection telling the electorate he will not be running for president...
Says a lot about you.
No, it says a lot about the Palinistas...
Have fun with post # 108........
>> Based on her actions, I assumed she was going to take the Reagan path - spend her time working for the party, fully develop her political philosophy, and find some way to add to her resume - run for the Senate, serve in a cabinet post, something like that. Then, after a few more years, she would be ready to try again.
My personal humble opinion is that you actually have her pegged pretty well. She is one of the shrewdest (and most innovative) of the fresh conservative faces I have ever seen.
>> But then came my experience with the Palinistas... They truly behave in a cultish fashion.... they try to destroy any opposing candidates and any of their supporters... I don’t want her supporters anywhere near the levers of power. If this is the type of supporter she inspires, then that says a lot of negative things about her candidacy as well.
I wouldn’t let a few knuckleheads color your opinion of Sarah Palin. Truth is, *most* of her supporters here — even the highly partisan ones — behave with class. As an example here on FR I’d offer “onyx” — and there are many others. It’s just that the most outrageous of the Palinistas stick in your mind.
I’m a Perry supporter because, as a pragmatist, I recognize that he’s the best candidate in the field, by a clear margin. I don’t think Palin will run this time around; if she does, depending on how and when she steps in, I’ll consider switching support. However, my hat is off to Sarah Palin because, in or out, she is keeping attention focused in the right place, and that’s a valuable service.
Just my 2c
FRegards
One can be an a$$hole and not be a rino... just like this pundit erikson.
LLS
You owe your fellow FReepers a courtesy ping.
So, sadly, I have now gone from the point where, while I didn't think Sarah was the best choice this cycle and I didn't think she could win, but I would support her if she got the nomination; to where I will actively oppose her nomination, and if she wins the nomination I will sit the election out. And it is because I don't want her supporters anywhere near the levers of power. If this is the type of supporter she inspires, then that says a lot of negative things about her candidacy as well.
RLY? Free Republic is a conservative forum. Sarah Palin is a thoroughly vetted TEA PARTY CONSERVATIVE, yet you will work against her getting the nomination "because of some of her supporters of all of her supporters?"
This type of thinking is not going to get us anywhere near our goals, which is this author's point.
It's wonderful to support the candidate of our choice, but how foolish is it to pout and threaten such childishness 14 months out from the election and way ahead of the first primary in Iowa?
Free Republic is not going to burn down over Perry/Palin wars, so I suggest that the flame bait posts cease and cool down.
Discussions and vetting of the candidates are one thing, but calling out posters are quite another.
Governor Perry is currently ahead in the polls, so most of the articles are about him. Most are good, some are not and the truth is likely found somewhere in between or some in each one. It's called the vetting process. He's not going to get a free ride or pass. That's not the way it works.
He's also not going to get *The Palin treatment*. No other candidate ever will and her mistreatment will continue. Peeping Joe McGuiness's book will soon hit the bookshelves.
Be well.
By the way, Perry's appeal seems to be broadening just fine - haven't you been watching the polls? Oh, that's right - you don't believe the polls because they have Sarah at 10% in the GOP race and show her with a 60%+ disapproval rating...
FR Ping etiquette?!
BTW, if ‘you’re’ candidate doesn’t get nomination, and another candidate does.. instead of sitting it out, why don’t you at least do a write in of your candidate?
That is what I will do in that situation, IF that is to happen.
Maybe you should read post 104 too. FR is a family. I wonder if we wouldn’t be throwing Thanksgiving dishes at each other sometimes. Most of us are here because we are diehard conservatives who are also political junkies who just LOVE to argue politics. That is just the way it is.
So this is what it has come down to: Sarah Palin is either an idiot, a crook, or a liar?
What, no "All of the above?"
Words fail me.
Again it begs the question: "why is it critical to declare early?"
Why is August better than September and June better than July? I understand in the case of Perry, unknown outside your own state and with a need to get his name out there (indeed, you can make an argument that August for Perry is later than September for Palin--"why did Perry wait so long?").
Does it damage somebody for her to wait? If so, why are those competitors so fragile?
There's a drop dead date for legal reasons at some point, but why go before that? Most Americans are exasperated by the very very very very very very long campaigns we have. One area in which we Americans frankly are a bit ridiculous. I'd love to see the parties announce that no delegates will be seated if they were selected before the month of May.
itsahoot, I’m pinging you as a courtesy because I’m quoting you, in response to Nervous Tick’ request for examples of attacks on the credibility of those who support other candidates.
This one is typical:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2773201/posts?page=737#737
“”By the way I consider supporting an Establishment RINO the same as working for the Democrat, different is I know it, you don’t.”
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.