Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Fox News: Gov. Palin to Reveal 2012 Pick on Greta Tonight
Palin Promotions ^ | 11/15/2011 | Ron Devito

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.

Ed. Note:

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.


TOPICS: Government; Politics
KEYWORDS: cain; gingrich; palin; romney
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-126 last
To: samtheman
I hope she says Gingrich but I think you're right, Cain is more likely and if she does say Cain I'm switching to Cain, from Gingrich. In the interests of Conservative Unity I will give up my own pick to go with Palin's Pick.

!!!

101 posted on 11/15/2011 11:55:19 AM PST by grey_whiskers (The opinions are solely those of the author and are subject to change without notice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: SoldierDad
This is a WRONG move by Palin IMHO. She should stay out of this unless she’s willing to throw her hat into the ring and declare her candidacy.

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.

102 posted on 11/15/2011 12:12:49 PM PST by backwoods-engineer (Any politician who holds that the state accords rights is an oathbreaker and an "enemy... domestic.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

http://i.imgur.com/ND1sf.jpg


103 posted on 11/15/2011 12:45:24 PM PST by TheOldLady (FReepmail me to get ON or OFF the ZOT LIGHTNING ping list)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Luther1917
I also think she should keep her mouth shut and let the primary process play itself out. That’s what DiMent is doing.

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.

104 posted on 11/15/2011 12:46:32 PM PST by Allegra (Hey! Stop looking at my tagline like that.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Springfield Reformer

IF she makes a pick, I’ll bet it’s GINGRICH...
I can easily see him making Palin Sec of Energy in his administration.


105 posted on 11/15/2011 12:47:30 PM PST by tcrlaf (Election 2012: THE RAPTURE OF THE DEMOCRATS)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Springfield Reformer

I hope she endorses... No one. Let the process play out.


106 posted on 11/15/2011 12:47:32 PM PST by rintense (ABO is not a winning strategy.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Springfield Reformer; Cincinatus' Wife; JulieRNR21; mickie
I predict she'll endorse Governor Perry....if not officially, then with complimentary comments.

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.

Leni

107 posted on 11/15/2011 12:54:58 PM PST by MinuteGal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MinuteGal

I’m glad she’ll do it on Greta’s show. Greta has been a good friend to the Palins.


108 posted on 11/15/2011 12:57:48 PM PST by Cincinatus' Wife
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 107 | View Replies]

To: indylindy

Exactly...Sarah has already stated it’d be in 2012, if she even endorses anyone.


109 posted on 11/15/2011 1:14:11 PM PST by shield (Rev 2:9 Woe unto those who say they are Judahites and are not, but are of the syna GOG ue of Satan.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: jakerobins

It should be principle over loyalty. I am glad she isn’t running.


110 posted on 11/15/2011 1:31:39 PM PST by kabar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: stars & stripes forever

Do you really believe she will not?

LLS


111 posted on 11/15/2011 1:42:40 PM PST by LibLieSlayer ("Americans are hungry to feel once again a sense of mission and greatness." Ronaldo Magnus)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 79 | View Replies]

To: kabar
It should be principle over loyalty.

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.

112 posted on 11/15/2011 1:55:02 PM PST by Springfield Reformer (Winston Churchill: No Peace Till Victory!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 110 | View Replies]

To: LibLieSlayer
Do you really believe she will not?

There's too much presuming going on around here.

113 posted on 11/15/2011 1:55:02 PM PST by stars & stripes forever ( Blessed is the nation whose God is the Lord.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 111 | View Replies]

To: Springfield Reformer
Loyalty is not a principle, it is a trait and value. When you put misplaced personal loyalty above principle you often get corruption. Richard Nixon and Joe Paterno are examples of how corrupting that can be.

Supporting McCain over a true conservative hurts the nation.

114 posted on 11/15/2011 2:05:27 PM PST by kabar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 112 | View Replies]

To: ken5050
Havign another 10-15 debates with 7-8 on stage...competing like trained seals for 60 seconds of time, demeans and diminishes them all...

That is very true, these 30 second answer debates are damn near worthless, and have in fact diminished the whole field.

115 posted on 11/15/2011 2:53:11 PM PST by ilgipper (Everything you get from the government was taken from someone else)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: kabar

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.


116 posted on 11/15/2011 3:51:29 PM PST by Springfield Reformer (Winston Churchill: No Peace Till Victory!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 114 | View Replies]

To: MinuteGal

I really don’t know if FR is ready for a Perry endorsement from Sarah.

Hooo-eeee.


117 posted on 11/15/2011 3:58:57 PM PST by txhurl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 107 | View Replies]

To: Springfield Reformer

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.


118 posted on 11/15/2011 7:16:33 PM PST by filbert (The GAME is still ON. The player isn't the game. The game is the game.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 116 | View Replies]

To: shield; casinva; Cincinatus' Wife; All
Sara Palin, on Greta's show, just said;

"The cream of the crop hasn't risen yet......."


119 posted on 11/15/2011 7:27:12 PM PST by potlatch (*snip*~ Having the right to be angry does not give one the right to be cruel. ~*snip*)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 118 | View Replies]

To: Springfield Reformer
Loyalty is a principle.

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.

120 posted on 11/15/2011 9:44:16 PM PST by kabar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 116 | View Replies]

To: potlatch

Looks like we’re churning butter.


121 posted on 11/15/2011 11:46:50 PM PST by Cincinatus' Wife
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 119 | View Replies]

To: txhurl

I watched it and she has not a negative thing to say about Ron Paul and said he should keep doing what he is doing and that is educating the American people on the problems with the economy. She is said it was not right that Ron Paul got a total of 89 seconds of question time on the last debate.

Looks to me like she might endorse Ron Paul. Would not surprise me in the least. One thing is certain, it will not be Romney. She talked at length on his flip-flops. Don’t think she likes him too much.


122 posted on 11/16/2011 7:53:23 AM PST by Luther1917
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 117 | View Replies]

To: Luther1917

lol


123 posted on 11/16/2011 8:06:16 AM PST by txhurl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 122 | View Replies]

To: Cincinatus' Wife

[Looks like we’re churning butter.]

Lol, could be!


124 posted on 11/16/2011 12:26:16 PM PST by potlatch (*snip*~ Having the right to be angry does not give one the right to be cruel. ~*snip*)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 121 | View Replies]

To: kabar

Please excuse the long delay in getting back to you. I had work obligations, and my loyalty to work and family compelled me to get that work done first. :)

Now, as to your definitions, I am surprised you do not see how they actually help my case that loyalty is in fact a principle. You cannot disagree that making a conscious decision to be loyal to one’s spouse constitutes a “professed rule of action or conduct,” or that such loyalty is expected of “a person of good moral principles.”

But if you truly believe it is merely a coincidental trait with no moral value, then you should, theoretically, have no problem with the following propositions:

1. It is morally indifferent to be disloyal to one’s spouse. Gingrich might like that one.

2. It is morally indifferent for a soldier to be disloyal for no particular reason to his commander, his fellows at arms who are relying on him, and even his country.

3. It is morally indifferent to be disloyal to truth.

4. It is morally indifferent to be disloyal to God.

Now it is true that the concept of loyalty appears in many different forms and expressions. For example, it is well-represented in the Scriptures as faithfulness, both as a trait and as a principle, and is applicable both to humans and to God. If God is faithful, and he is, are there really any attributes of God that are mere accidental traits with no moral significance? And even if there were, could one account faithfulness as one of those traits, when God clearly holds it up to us as one of His own “rules of action” that we are to imitate in our own life?

If this is not sufficient for you, I don’t know what to do. I guess we’ll have to agree to disagree. I’m sure you agree it will not help to carry on indefinitely. So if you want to keep going, fine. If not, that’s fine too.

Peace,

SR


125 posted on 11/16/2011 2:23:37 PM PST by Springfield Reformer (Winston Churchill: No Peace Till Victory!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 120 | View Replies]

To: PalinPlease
What would Jefferson know about fighting Moslems,

LOLOLOL...ever heard of the Barbary Pirates?

Ever wonder why we have a Marine Corpse?

126 posted on 11/17/2011 5:03:42 PM PST by Las Vegas Ron (Rush Limbaugh = the Beethoven of talk radio)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 93 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-126 last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson