Skip to comments.Fox News: Gov. Palin to Reveal 2012 Pick on Greta Tonight
Posted on 11/15/2011 7:52:36 AM PST by Springfield Reformer
Gov. Palin tonight will reveal on Greta Van Susteren's On the Record which declared candidate she believes has the best chance of beating Obama in 2012, according to promotional language on Fox News' home page and in a promo video.
If the foregoing is true, we can reasonably conclude that all reconsideration, "earthquake" and other such efforts should cease. Further, this pick may or may not constitute an official Palin endorsement of a declared candidate.
As I, an ardent Palin supporter, keep trying to tell FReepers, SHE IS NOT RUNNING, in part because of the death threats against her family.
Moreover, I don't want someone who says "family comes first" to be POTUS. Can you imagine it? Some terrorist gets one of the kids, and President Palin lets them nuke NY to save her? Scary stuff.
Let's move on. Palin is just a commentator now.
I agree. She has that weird little cult following who will do exactly as she says.
She should remain silent and force the cult types to make up their own minds.
IF she makes a pick, I’ll bet it’s GINGRICH...
I can easily see him making Palin Sec of Energy in his administration.
I hope she endorses... No one. Let the process play out.
She knows the debates are empty buffoonery which is fracturing the GOP and making a mockery of a party's entire primary....and she well knows it's got to stop, and we start uniting around one candidate.
I’m glad she’ll do it on Greta’s show. Greta has been a good friend to the Palins.
Exactly...Sarah has already stated it’d be in 2012, if she even endorses anyone.
It should be principle over loyalty. I am glad she isn’t running.
Do you really believe she will not?
Loyalty is a principle, and of high and ancient reputation. The problem is what do you do when two or more principles conflict? You can make anybody look like an idiot by focusing on one principle to the exclusion of all others. But that's not real life. Sarah is an exceptional thinker, and I believe she resolved those conflicts as well as anybody could in her situation, and in a manner vastly superior to Obama, and as well as or better than anyone among the GOP presidential contenders. She would have been a fine President, and I am sorry she is not running.
There's too much presuming going on around here.
Supporting McCain over a true conservative hurts the nation.
That is very true, these 30 second answer debates are damn near worthless, and have in fact diminished the whole field.
Nope. Loyalty is a principle. For example, you are loyal to your spouse. There are reasons for that loyalty, but sometimes a relationship is challenged and those reasons become temporarily unclear. Loyalty allows one to get through those difficult times without destroying a relationship of great value. That is principled behavior.
Where I think some are confused is that virtue is the inculcation of principled behavior into personal habits or traits. However, a principle is no less a principle simply because it is being lived out as a virtue, or because it has become a habit of behavior.
But when such a habit is followed to the exclusion of all other principles, then it ceases to be virtuous. For example, you are loyal to your spouse, but your spouse decides to harm an innocent person. You, being habitually loyal, must invoke a higher principle, the principle of doing no harm to the innocent, and thus while you are still loyal, you are able to avoid blind loyalty, and so you work to prevent your spouse from doing said harm.
Yet your impulse to do no harm is also a habit, a trait, a pattern of behavior. A virtue. And if a virtue, then grounded in principle. Only it is not alone, but has many companion principles that interact with each other, both in the abstract, and as expressed by the pattern of your life.
Loyalty is a good thing. But as with any principle, it can be abused, especially when isolated from the other virtues and treated as an end in itself. That is the dark heart of cronyism, absolute loyalty at the expense of wisdom, truth, kindness, etc. Like St. Paul says, everything in moderation. Or as Solomon says, there is a proper time under heaven for everything.
I really don’t know if FR is ready for a Perry endorsement from Sarah.
At some point, we’re all going to have to suck it up and get behind somebody that—no matter who it is—a bunch of us aren’t going to particularly like. Certainly most of us will wind up with a candidate who wasn’t our first choice.
Welcome to politics, I guess.
But the road back will be a marathon, not a sprint. Today’s (primary) enemy will be tomorrow’s (general election) ally—or our best hope, anyway to at least try to turn back the Obama-led leftist flood.
loy·al·ty /ˈlɔɪəlti/ Show Spelled[loi-uhl-tee] Show IPA noun, plural -ties.
1. the state or quality of being loyal; faithfulness to commitments or obligations.
2. faithful adherence to a sovereign, government, leader, cause, etc.
3. an example or instance of faithfulness, adherence, or the like: a man with fierce loyalties.
prin·ci·ple /ˈprɪnsəpəl/ Show Spelled[prin-suh-puhl] Show IPA noun
1. an accepted or professed rule of action or conduct: a person of good moral principles.
2. a fundamental, primary, or general law or truth from which others are derived: the principles of modern physics.
3. a fundamental doctrine or tenet; a distinctive ruling opinion: the principles of the Stoics.
4. principles, a personal or specific basis of conduct or management: to adhere to one's principles; a kindergarten run on modern principles.
5. guiding sense of the requirements and obligations of right conduct: a person of principle.
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.