Posted on 04/21/2010 5:03:14 AM PDT by Federalist Patriot
Well OK but who then??
Compared to...what?
I honestly have no idea why she went for Romney. I suspect its because of his business/budgeting acumen.
It darn well better be a governor for crying out loud.
Go Sarah!
The establishment loves Sarah because she rouses the voters, and makes them think the Party believes in things it doesn’t. They love that her ideas are confused for those of the Republican establishment, but would be horrified if those ideas were actually implemented.
I supported Romney too. But if Rush had more openly backed Thompson, it would have helped. I was a critic of Rush Limbaugh being a kingmaker in 2000 for Bush, and now I regret it. Bush wasn’t ideal, but a darn sight better than McStain.
If Palin can assure us that her call for “path to citizenship” is not anything like “guest worker”, then I’m 100% for her. That’s a high enough bar to overcome.
As I recall she was very critical of Alito.
If there's any lesson I take away from this thread it's that 'conservatives' (in quotes because there are too many posters here who really aren't, but play one on the Internet) are slow learners.
It's not that they don't have the answers...it's that they've not even figured out the questions.
I have taken the pledge never to vote for another RINO, and I shall keep that pledge.
Mrs. Palin has more guts that most of the Republican Party combined. Example: Jindal.
I was at the event and Ann was very nuanced in her comments about Sarah Palin. She was asked more than once about Palin, and although she expressed an affinity for Palin and respect for her ability to excite the base, reading between the lines, it was obvious to me that Coulter does not think Palin has the intellect to win the Presidency. Listening to Ann answer unscripted questions off the cuff for over 30 minutes on subjects from Israel, gays in the military, Palin, Obamacare, tea partiers, etc., the contrast between her and Palin could not be more obvious.
The most striking thing she said about Palin was that she thought that ‘some day’ Palin might be ‘prepared’ enough for a run for national office. To me those were code words for saying Palin does not have the breadth and knowledge of the many diverse issues a POTUS candidate must have.
Her best comment of the night I thought was her expressing admiration for Chris Christie of NJ, and saying he was one to watch for future national office potential.
I have absolute confidence in her.
Amen.
“I do love her, but I think I prefer her doing what she’s doing now, at which she’s spectacular. She’s making a lot of money and she’s having a great life. She has - she’s giving all this energy to the base of the Republican Party - the Conservative Movement.”
______________________________
Classic false alternative. She can run AND excite the base of the Republican party. In fact, if she does not run, it is going to DEPRESS the base of the Republican party. A lot.
Ann Coulter has been blowing Romney kisses for the last three years. She has ZERO credibility.
Clinton’s impeachment is her claim to fame. As far as Presidential candidates, I have never known her to support a VIABLE conservative. She trashed Fred Thompson mercilessly over Impeachment, which was a minor issue in the grand scheme of things and gave Mittens a pass on RomneyCare (the prototype for ObamaCare)-—a VERY BIG DEAL—and his facilitation of gay marriage in Massachusetts, another odious first for the nation. She always said her first choice was Duncan Hunter (a conservative who had no chance)and Mitt Romney (a liberal who did).
Ronald Reagan excited the conservative base BY running. So will Sarah Palin. Ann Coulter is totally irrelevant, as usual.
I thought Rush did a very good job of endorsing Thompson without actually saying it. He had nothing but praise for Fred, especially during the debates.
“Coulter does not think Palin has the intellect to win the Presidency. Listening to Ann answer unscripted questions off the cuff for over 30 minutes on subjects from Israel, gays in the military, Palin, Obamacare, tea partiers, etc., the contrast between her and Palin could not be more obvious.”
Mark Levin, who could run rings around Coulter (and, I imagine, you) disagrees with you about Sarah Palin’s intellect. And let me tell you something else, just because Coulter is adept at trashing people does not equate with intellect. Her facts are often wrong. Westbrook Pegler didn’t have a sharp intellect; it was a sharp tongue. Ditto Coulter.
I agree. Palin is best ralling the troops.
In this one I think she has partly lost it because of her support for another candidate, one Mitt Romney. Her choice of him for the GOP nomination makes no sense in light of her beliefs, and her comment here needs to be taken in that light.
If Sarah runs, she'll be fine. If she decides not to, she'll do quite well in the roll she wants to fulfill, not the one that Ann wants for her.
Coulter used facts in her answers, not generalities. I agree Mark Levin is brilliant, but anyone who does an honest evaluation of Sarah Palin would realize she is not an intellectual. She has charisma, and a folksy charm, but to me that is not nearly enough.
As for running rings around me, I would agree Levin certainly would. However, I would be willing to sit down with Sarah Palin and debate a diverse range of issues, from Obamacare, to energy policy, to AGW, to foreign policy. Levin would intimidate me if I had to go head to head against him, Palin would not. And that fact is precisely what would cause me to have a very hard time supporting her. She is eye candy, and the camera likes her. She reminds me of a female John Edwards, trying to be the common man, speaking in generalities, and lacking substance.
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.