Posted on 06/20/2012 4:34:56 PM PDT by NoLibZone
Sarah Palin says that Obama did not respect the balance of power in the federal government when he issued his executive order last week on immigration, that he is now just telling Americans what he deems best by fiat. It was so blatant that she also suggested that we go back and talk to some of his former students because it’s clear Obama doesn’t understand our constitutional process.
She was also asked about criticism that she didn’t mention Romney in her speech at Right Online. But her reason was simple, that it would have violated the ground rules based on AFP’s legal status as a non-profit. But she makes very clear where she stands and said that if the vote were had today, she wouldn’t blink in voting for Romney over Obama and maintains she’s always held the position of anybody but Obama.
Watch below Video at link:
So.. who are you going to vote for?
She intended to say his name, it was part of her prepared remarks.
Trouble is that she quit halfway through them.
One would think from all this blather that Mitt Romney has been cheering nonstop for PPACA, a turkey so vile that it did not get even one GOP vote in Congress.
Now run along and bother some bloggers....
Just like to present a possibility:
That Sarah Palin will vote FOR Rommey.
Haven’t seen that yet, but if it happens that way, it would make sense also to vote for Romney.
Let’s see how Palin votes.
Ah, another Freeper for Obama...
Well it's about that simple now.
1: You hold your nose and vote for Romney
or
2: You don't.
Don't waste my time with a third party. It's a joke.
If you don't vote for Romney I don't want to hear you bitching about Obama for the next 4 years.
Remember that is where moveon.org originated....remember Monica
Thanks Windflier. Your comments express my thoughts too. It’s a mess. We will be relying on the other branches of our government, and I have serious concerns about a Republican House and Senate standing up to the White House, if the Republicans occupy it. That’s just how serious this is.
If Obama is in the White House, a Republican House and Senate will probably oppose him. If Romney is in there, there’s a real possibility they’ll go with whatever he proposes.
That’s why voting for Romeny is not as great an idea as a lot of people think.
Strongly disagree:
Obama will be on a no-lose junket for four more years.
Every single program he has started, will continue. Many more will grow, and every move will be met with non-stop roars of approval from the “media”.
We must un-elect Obama. Must.
Everything else can wait.
Thank you Twink. I appreciate it.
I think your take on it is logical. I understand the reasoning behind ABO. Heck, I’ve voted that way much of my life. Today we exist in an era when I’m not convinced that works any longer. Both sides are so bad.
A lot of folks are hoping that we take the House and Senate this year. I believe there is a chance this may take place, because as I understand it the Dems have more Senators standing for re-election than the Republicans do, and some of them are not solidly re-electable.
Okay, what happens if we do take both the Senate and Congress. If we still have Obama in the White House, we can oppose his treachery. If we have Romney in there, that doesn’t play. Republicans are very reluctant to oppose their president.
IMO, Romney would be able to propose some very lousy legislation and the Republicans would pass it.
I don’t like thinking of it in these terms, but this is the reality we are faced with.
The dynamics are such this year, that I don’t see a valid reason to vote for either candidate. Either way, we’re screwed.
Do I want to see Obama re-elected? Frankly, no. Do I want to see Romney elected? Frankly, no.
Food for thought...
It was my hope that we would loft a real Conservative this year, we would take the Senate, the House, and the White House. Imagine what we could have done with that.
That dream died when Romney won the primaries. It was really the death of a chance for our nation this next four years. It may be the death of it for a full eight years.
Didn’t Sarah sling a little mud at Newt?
I seem to recall she called Gingrich a “narrow minded egotistical machine goon.” ... or something like that.
I appreciate your take on it, and I’m not going to give you guff over it.
Folks wanted me to vote for Bush too. I did in 2004. Out of Bush we got another Great Society program and a financial system collapse that nearly took our nation down.
He had a Republican lock on the House and Senate for six years.
Just how much Leftist legislation did he roll back during his two terms?
I see Romney as much worse than Bush. There’s no way I can vote for him.
It’s probably going to frost a lot of people, but that’s how I see it.
That's not what I remember.
Sarah Palin casts vote for Gingrich at Alaska caucus.
I voted for Newt also but that battle is over.
No. If true, she affirms, like all so-called "ABOs" do, that
IT'S. ROMNEY.
btw, Newt was my favorite also.
Yeah, you’re a True Bluer, all right.
I’d love to hear you describe “what I’m all about”, Twinkle. Please do-—in detail. It should be enjoyable. Because I have a feeling your definition of “suck up” is someone who actually TALKS to people on this forum, regardless of their sign-up date, and finds them friendly and likeable. You, apparently, are caught up in some mindset of cliques and “popular kids”. I outgrew that crap in high school.
Maybe you should get some fresh air, get into the real world, hm?
Excuse me, but no Republican is entitled to my vote just by virtue of being registered in the Republican party. And excuse me, my third party vote -- DO THE MATH YOURSELF -- is 100% neutral in influencing the outcome of the O v R race. Saying that my third party vote would "cause" Obama to win is not only wrong, it is entitlement mentality rearing its ugly head and posing as "logic."
Frankly, I think Obama is in as much trouble with Democrats as Romney is with Republicans. I think a lot of Democrats are going to vote third party in their disgust with Obama -- I've already seen indications of it among Democrat folks I know. It is entirely up in the air as to which one would win because BOTH are despised, though the MSM does a careful job of concealing that fact regarding Obama.
I have stood eye-to-eye with Romney's record and undertand that both morally and politically, he is off the table, as off the table as Obama is, when it comes to my vote. Yet I have a duty to vote.
I'll leave whether the winner is Obama or Romney up to those Americans willing to sanction them in enough numbers, and Obama is hugely loathed and despised by the majority of Americans, despite how the MSM tries to mislead people on that topic. So it is entirely up in the air as to which statist wins. I wash my hands of playing any part in that decision.
I cannot vote against either socialist, and neither can you. DO THE MATH.
You, like every American who casts a vote, may tell yourself that you're voting "against" something, but MATHEMATICALLY you can only actually vote FOR something or someone. You are willing to vote FOR turning the Republican party hard left and risking a disatrous landslide mandate, in order to vote "against" Obama.
MATHEMATICALLY, that is what you would be voting FOR.
I know that no matter how I vote, an anti-conservative authoritarian statist liberal who will push global warming, government-run health care, the homosexual agenda, abortion (unless you actually believe Romney's "conversion" -- hahahahah) and activist judges will end up in the White House. MATHEMATICALLY, I cannot vote "against" that and neither can anyone else.
But MATHEMATICALLY, I can vote FOR making the path as rough and rocky and difficult as possible for the winner -- and so can you. I will vote conservative Republican down ticket and third party at the top of the ticket for the sole purpose of contributing to splitting the presidential vote so that the next leftist president, Romney or Obama, gets in on a plurlaity, hopefully one so embarassing that nearly two in three Americans voted against the clown.
Fear makes people roll over and do things they regret later. Fear is the sole -- THE ONLY -- premise of ABO. ABO is a bad strategy.
Romney, and most politicians, stick their fingers at “conservatives.” This ain’t church. This is real life whether you want to acknowledge that or not.
Whatever. I don’t really care who you vote for or why.
No politician has to pander to you and whatever beliefs you espouse....liberals do that. You either believe that or you don’t. I don’t give a damn if a politician panders to my beliefs or my eccentricitries...He or she works for me, not the other way around. You seem to have a victim complex, just like libs do.
No politician has to pander to your religious beliefs either.
Don’t vote for him. No one cares. I sure as hell don’t care. I’ll vote for him because Obama is the alternative and that’s not acceptable to me. As you said, keep thumping your bible....
Yes you care who we vote for or we would not be having this conversation.
I'm not asking Romney to pander to me. I just want a candidate I believe has similar values as mine. Every thoughtful voter looks for that.
Of course he does pander. They all do. He pandered to the log cabin republicans and promised them he would get gay marriage passed, that it would be a republican, not a democrats who gets it done.
Again he pandered to gays when he forced children, starting with 5 yr olds, to be indoctrinated into the gay lifestyle. If he wasn't pandering, he's perverted.
And again he pandered to gays by forcing adoption agencies to let gays adopt in MA. The Catholic Church had to stop their adoption Charities after 109 years; thanks to Romney.
He agrees with global warming. Is he pandering to the environmental wacko? Or is he just gullible enough to believe something he has not searched out the truth on.
He was for banning guns, pandering to the left. Does he believe in the constitution or not?
He was for abortion so he could be MA governor, he was against abortion so he could run for president, he was pro-abortion so he could get romneycare through, he was against abortion because he was speaking to republicans, he was for abortion because he was speaking to left leaning groups......
Unforced by anyone, Romney overruled his own Commissioner of Public Health and lied about state law in order to compel Catholic hospitals to issue abortifacient pills. Is he pro-life, pandering to someone or just evil?
Yes, most pro-lifers are mad that he would not speak for our cause; A cause he says he agrees with. He arrogantly said we would vote for him. A least obama respects people enough to go to their events and ask for their votes. Romney is arrogant in saying this. Why would we? We have NOTHING in common with him. We see his being whoever he needs to be to get a vote. How do you know what kind of president he will be? He's like a chameleon who changes his colors according to his environment.
Be honest. Are you a Christian? A Mormon or a Mormon who calls himself a Christian? An atheist? I'm not judging you. I just am trying to figure out where you're coming from. We apparently have different beliefs and values. If your only goal to take out Obama, you have let your fears overtake you. He's not God. He can't do things that conservatives can't change back.
I am not voting for Romney because I am afraid of Obama. People who are not voting for Romney ARE voting the rest of the ticket. I will bet we will take the house and senate by a wide margin. Obama is already in so much trouble in so many ways. Anything he tries to do will be overturned. If Romney get in he will think people like his policies and will continue the things Obama has been doing. You need to step back and look at the whole picture. If we get Romney many republicans will think they need to do whatever he wants. I am so tired of calling my senator/congressman. I want a leader I don't constantly have to restrain. I also won't vote for someone who knowingly cheats to get what he wants. That is obama style politics. I use to believe in the party, no longer. They are just like the democrats and I'm sad to say many rep voters are like dem voters in that they tow the party line and believe the party lies. The party elitist are in for a rude awakening.
One last thing. Romney only talks about money. He might throw out a line about other issues, but he never strays from talking about money. My daughter law who is republican won't vote for him because he's so “one dimensional” she thinks he is all image and not substance. She does not vote because of social issues. She says she thinks he's a player but doesn't know what games he's playing. Bottom line, there is something about him she does not like or trust. This is her whole family. Many people sense he's disingenuous. She's a nurse and knows how to read people. Romney is not getting a large portion of the base. True conservatives will vote in concert for a write in candidate or en mass for a third party candidate. Sorry, we don't vote out of fear or for someone we know is wrong.
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.