“Playing devil’s advocate, won’t some s*it disturber from the media ask Governor Palin after she enters the race, if you feel this way about Rick Perry and crony capitalism, why did you endorse him for Governor of Texas?”
Perhaps. But the level of scrutiny for President is so much greater. Palin can truthfully say that she didn’t vet him to the extent that he is now being vetted and that in any case she judges him better than his opposition, Kay Bailey Hutchison, prochoice RINO, and the truther Deb Medina.
The fact that one is the best candidate for dog catcher does not make one the best candidate for President.
That won’t wash.
She didn’t have to endorse anyone in that race. She could’ve simply avoided it.
Second, she didn’t say she endorsed him because his opponents were so lacking, and stop there.
No, she wrote a highly praising endorsement letter in which, among other gems, she said that Rick Perry “walks the walk of a true conservative”.
What? And now we’re expected to believe that all along she believed he was a crook?
I won’t overlook it, and if she proceeds to pretend such things along this line in the future, I will constantly remind and remind and remind.
If she is nominated of course I will vote for her.
But this is serious loss of credibility to try to spin her out of her strongly expressed support for Perry, whether the attempted spin is by her or whether by her supporters.
The words she used on his behalf do not allow for this spin.
Palin in the fray | The Economist
http://www.economist.com/blogs/democracyinamerica/2009/02/palin_2012_ladies_against_wome
Money quote, among other gems about Perry: “He walks the walk of a true conservative”.
But she actually believed he was a crook when she wrote that?
Uh huh.
Right.