Posted on 03/06/2012 1:18:08 PM PST by NoLibZone
Pity Palin did not run.
Truth wrapped in brevity.
They pick the battles. It is all designed to discredit conservatives as whole, by exploiting perceived stereotypes.
I dropped the GOP for good when they let her twist in the wind after the 08 election.
She went back home and faced legal and financial ruin, and the GOP did nothing.
Republicans trashed her in the press, leaked lies, and did everything they could to make her un-electable for the rest of her life.
The RNC should have mentored her, protected her reputation, helped get her ready future in DC.
They saw with their own eyes her potential....her crowds, her fundraising, and her excellent campaigning abilities.
Why, oh why, would they cut her off? She is so young, and has so much promise.
I don’t get it.
Cowards all.
Sarah knows why. So do the rest of us.
She’s asking the question because none of our other “leaders” have the backbone or gumption to stand for what’s right.
She’s what we need.
Sarah is by now completely vetted and been through the wringer. She can now sit back and cause all sorts of problems for the scumbags, on either side. Go SARAH! GO Michele Bachman!!
Sarah should be running. Instead we are left with this sorry POS:
Mitt Romney (Who Has Extensive Experience in the Private Sector) Says He Won’t Make “Incendiary” Attacks on Obama to Excite the Conservative Base
When you’re a sub-human pile, you don’t need to say sorry, because one look and everyone knows you’re sorry.
.
>> “The difference is, and I hate to say it - they are at war with us, and we are not at war with them.” <<
.
And that is how our savior said it was to be.
But if you look at the last chapter (I peeked) you’ll see that we win, and they get BBQ’d.
Jeff, if you were President, we’d have to hire the entire Marine Corps(e) to replace the secret service.
[Sandra Fluke admitted openly, to a congressional committee, that she is openly and extremely promiscuous.]
You are wrong. No where, in her testimony before an UNOFFICIAL Democratic-sponsored hearing on Feb. 23 does she say that she PERSONALLY uses birth control or has sex. No where did she say she was 23 years old - as others have ranted about.
She said “without insurance coverage, contraception can cost a woman over $3000 during law school” and she wasn’t talking about condoms or BC pills, she was talking about overall BC INSURANCE coverage.
Here is the transcript of her testimony at the unofficial
Democratic-sponsored hearing on Feb. 23;
http://abcnews.go.com/images/Politics/Testimony%20-%20Sandra%20Fluke.pdf
I am a Catholic and oppose Obama’s efforts to go against our moral beliefs and the separation between church and government. We can’t let him win this and we know the democrats used this woman, as a tool, to scare women regarding the restriction of contraceptives.
At the same time, I support TRUTH above all and it’s obvious after reading posts for many days, that few people bothered to actually read her testimony. It seems that even Rush didn’t read it!!
*
YES! God Bless her for standing up to these dem creeps.
Thanks onyx.
He’s pond scum.
I believe it is Mrs. Palin.
> At the same time, I support TRUTH above all and it’s obvious after reading posts for many days, that few people bothered to actually read her testimony. It seems that even Rush didn’t read it!!
Thank you Potlatch, as another opponent of Obama and of Fluke the provocateur, but also one who read what she actually said.
I was thinking about this earlier today. I rarely listen to Rush anymore because I am doing other things when he is on the air. In the early 1990s, I listened to him daily. Rush gets his material from news stories. If you search for the first reports of Ms. Fluke’s presentation, you kind of get the idea that she was asking for contraceptive coverage for herself. I read multiple stories last Tuesday night on this subject. The stories gave me the same impression that Rush seemed to have. I jumped to conclusions that may or may not be correct. I also looked more closely at some of her testimony, and I questioned and still question her truthfulness. But knowing how Rush has always read news stories and developed monologues based on those stories, I think his mistake was in his calls for video of someone using taxpayer funded contraceptives. It was over the top. But that’s my opinion. The issue is about religious liberty. We need to stick to the issues.
I have gone back and read her testimony. I relied on what others said. it is clear her testimony ias full of lawywer speak and inuendo, things she implies without ever truly implicating herself.
She is a willing tool for those trying to desgtroy our way of life and encourage this destructive life style and behavior. Though she never admitted to it herself, she clearly indicates that the contraceptives cost far more than is true itself, and aludes to the type of promiscuity it implies...but, as you say, without herself admitting to any of it.
Going after her directly ios a trap...we need however to focus squarely ion the insidious over-reach she is helping Obama impose, and the behaovior it is encourageing...which does meet the definition.
Thanks for your remarks.
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.