Posted on 11/02/2011 6:04:56 PM PDT by nhwingut
LOL
She has largely disappeared from the news, appears infrequently on fox, has no new books out; in general, is becoming irrelevant to the current political and historical picture in the US.
I will predict that her tenure as a pundit on fox will come to an end before 2012; particularly if a rino/repub/conserv/tparty candidate eradicates the stain in the general election.
While the msm, the fox intelligencia, and the dem/lib/prog/pops all helped....Mrs. Palin drove the political stake through her own heart. She is done as a political force or a "voice from the right".
In a word....she is irrelevant to current politics in the US.
IMHO................
bttt
I don’t know, EH. I have wrestled with that very problem. I have been raised my whole life to honor the God-Family-Everything Else priority scheme rather strictly, as a function of my commitment to Scripture. I have no doubt Sarah takes that same view, that this is God’s rule for her life. Not that those other things don’t impact family, but that I am obligated as a Christian to the well-being of my family, especially if the action in question was optional.
Is it really true, for example, that the only way to save the country is for Sarah to run? Some would say so, but I don’t think Sarah believes that. She repeatedly said the opposite, that she is not an egoist, thinking she’s the only one who could pull it out. She is by nature and training a team player, and given conditions on the field of play, she thinks her better role is passing the ball to a player with a better chance of scoring.
Furthermore, she has forfeited much “treasure” in quest of serving her country. To keep herself available for a possible campaign, she passed on an offer of a second season of her Alaska show, worth about ten million. That’s not the pattern of someone avoiding their public duty. That’s the pattern of a commited patriot. Being willing to serve doesn’t guarantee your number will come up, but it does tell people where your heart is.
A reasonable reply. Thank you.
So here’s a question for you: If you were serving in the military and got orders into combat, would you go? Even if you had a wife and two kids and your death would most certainly be bad for your family?
Personally, I think the answer is pretty clear: You would do your duty. Your country would come before your family.
My quarrel with Sarah Palin is not that she did not run, but the REASON she did not run. She explicitly said her priorities are, and always have been: God, family, country. In that order. Sarah Palin’s stated reason for not running made it clear that her family comes before the country.
This country is in enormous peril. We need a leader who can put the country ahead of themselves, including their own family. A lot of shared sacrifice will be necessary to right this ship, if it is not already too late. A leader who is not willing to sacrifice personally cannot ask others to do so and expect them to follow.
That does not mean she is not a good and decent person. I think she is.
But right now we need someone with the leadership ability and all out personal commitment of a Winston Churchill. Winston Churchill offered his countrymen “blood, toil, tears and sweat”, and he brought them through one of Britain’s darkest hours.
Personally, I thought Sarah Palin was our best hope to fill that role. I was wrong.
She made a decision. Politics is like war though, and the facts can change, so the strategy must change with them. I’m sure that she doesn’t consider Mitt to be a viable alternative to Obama, therefore if it becomes obvious that Cain’s campaign is being derailed she will do the right thing and challenge the Mittless wonderboy.
Yeah, it can’t possibly be that her family comes first, can it? From jump I thought Palin was real, and real people don’t blithely throw their family under the bus for personal gain. It was soon after Bristol’s encounter with the middle-aged gay walking talking metaphor for Palin hate that she punted. Punting is strategy too.
Family comes before country absent threat of annihilation from a foreign enemy. To think that she is the only one capable is to be deluded. If she thought she was the only one capable she would be deluded. The fact that she has a clear grasp of what is really important proves she is not. True.
Quite a lot of us thought that.
Quite a lot of us were wrong.
If that’s her decision, then she should stick with it.
If that’s her decision, then she should change it.
Reasonable minds can differ.
And it is, a woman’s prerogative.
A lot of folks, including Freepers, ruled Palin out because we were (ostensibly) looking for somebody more articulate, less burdened by nasty baggage, and in general better able to win.
Tell me, guys. How’s that search workin’ out for ya?
LOL.
I called them chicken hearted in a previous thread and I meant it.
Tell me, guys. How’s that search workin’ out for ya?
Nailed it.
I respect your analogy, but I think it is misplaced. The obvious answer to your question is yes, of course. But unlike a politician who has not even entered the race, when I join the military I have already made the commitment to risk death for my country.
But even in the military I do not assume such a risk without the blessing of command authority. I do not jump in my own personal B-52 and go drop bombs on bad people just because I personally think I should. Am I right?
And who is Palin's Commander in Chief? God, I should hope. If she believes God told her no, by whatever means, she has no business getting in the cockpit of that "campaign plane" and doing her own thing. It is very difficult to take an action on principle you know will disappoint people who will not understand you. This is what she has done, out of respect for God, and love for her family, and it has only increased my respect for her.
However, I assume you are firm in your position, and I'm OK with that, so I guess we'll have to agree to disagree. The cards now on the table are the ones we've been dealt, so we have to make the best of it. Churchill, were he able to look over our shoulders just now, would doubtless advise us not to look back, but to look forward, and to keep marching relentlessly forward until we win.
I respect your analogy, but I think it is misplaced. The obvious answer to your question is yes, of course. But unlike a politician who has not even entered the race, when I join the military I have already made the commitment to risk death for my country.
But even in the military I do not assume such a risk without the blessing of command authority. I do not jump in my own personal B-52 and go drop bombs on bad people just because I personally think I should. Am I right?
And who is Palin's Commander in Chief? God, I should hope. If she believes God told her no, by whatever means, she has no business getting in the cockpit of that "campaign plane" and doing her own thing. It is very difficult to take an action on principle you know will disappoint people who will not understand you. This is what she has done, out of respect for God, and love for her family, and it has only increased my respect for her.
However, I assume you are firm in your position, and I'm OK with that, so I guess we'll have to agree to disagree. The cards now on the table are the ones we've been dealt, so we have to make the best of it. Churchill, were he able to look over our shoulders just now, would doubtless advise us not to look back, but to look forward, and to keep marching relentlessly forward until we win.
It sounds like our positions are very close, with the exception of the actual reason Sarah Palin decided not to run.
Your view (correct me if I’m wrong) seems to be that she prayed about it, and concluded that God had answered her prayer in the negative. That was essentially Mike Huckabee’s stated reason. If that were Sarah Palin’s stated reason I would still support her.
For that matter, there are many other stated reasons that would have been entirely satisfactory. She could simply have said she felt her candidacy would not have been in the best interest of the country and let it go at that. My respect for her would have gone UP instead of down.
My view is based on her actual stated reason, which focused on her family. I’m sure she prayed about it and many factors were considered, but that does not change what she actually SAID.
If what she SAID is the true reason, then she does not have the absolute commitment to the job and the nation that will be required of the next President.
In my view we face the worst crisis since at least the Civil War, and possibly since Valley Forge. In both cases we were led by people that put God first, and the nation second. We need no less NOW.
We can agree to disagree, and still be on the same basic side. (The people who attacked me on this thread do not seem to realize that.)
If you know who has the Sarah Ping list, ping em!
Also, we should see if we can get this put on the sidebar and create noise!!!!
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.