Analysis: Palin takes own tack in presidential prelude

Reuters ^ | March 27, 2011 | Steve Holland

[Hawk720]

“Please show us a tape or post where she said troops on the ground.”

http://www.examiner.com/sarah-palin-in-national/palin-continues-to-push-no-fly-zone-over-libya

“Certainly a no fly zone,” Palin said. “I hate to say, jeez, more troops on the ground. You know send more of our brave young men and women over there in Libya. When yes, 41 years of Gadhafi. He’s got to go.”

Video at the link.

[Clyde5445]

WITH A SERVANT’S HEART

[Huck]

I think many in the GOP create foreign policy that is not in our own best interests. They do it for different reasons.

I think McCain is irrational, and likes to talk tough. I think certain neocons want to be Imperial Rome. And then there are people like Palin, who don't have any idea what they're talking about.

[imfrmdixie]

“normal rules and the normal conventional wisdom”

This is the line I just loved from the article....what the heck is normal and who decided it? This is PRECISELY why I support her 100%....she doesn’t take the “normal” route.

Why should she deal her hand on policies as yet? She hasn’t declared. She is a private citizen at this point and has opinions...as I do...but I don’t have anything to speak of that would be considered “policy”. Why give people any information until it is necessary in a campaign?

Besides, any buffoon who says she doesn’t now this and doesn’t know that should just look at that jerk in the White House....he absolutely knows nothing and he isn’t even trying to do a good job. At least I firmly believe Sarah Palin would work her bee-hind off for the American people!

I have already signed up for AZ to help her in any way I can. IT’S COMING....HER CAMPAIGN...AND I CAN’T WAIT!!

[Huck]

I didn’t say she called for ground troops. I said she wouldn’t rule them out. Despite having no idea who the rebels are, or what our national interest is in getting involved in Libya’s civil war, she was absolutely ready to send the US military over there to get involved, and she was at best squeamish about ground troops, but didn’t say no.

[imfrmdixie]

“Conservatives only need to find one thing they disagree with the candidate on and it’s curtains for that candidate.”

You are so dead right on!!......and that is why we haven’t had a TRUE Conservative POTUS in...how long?....years?? And...it is going to happen again this election because we are going to be snarling at each other and the elitist controllers will put their candidate in ONCE AGAIN and we will have let it happen!!

[JPG]

You have made probably the sanest comment on this entire thread. Thank you.

[JPG]

Aren't you late for your quilting meeting?

[Huck]

That’s true. Like how Mitch Daniels gets attacked around here.

[WHBates]

"According to the article, she was not getting much financial support from Big Corporations. Oil companies among them."

Well if anyone figured she would get any kind of serious money for large corporation they would be wrong. Oil companies (large ones anyway) don't trust people like Palin. She actually believes what she says. They much prefer phonies like Romney and Huckabee.

I like Palin but for that very reason I don't think she'll win the nomination.

[2ndDivisionVet]

Huh? What does that mean?

[PSYCHO-FREEP]

Palin shot herself in the foot on that issue herself, by what she did while she was Governor of Alaska. The damage was extensive and production was cut by about 40% as a result. (Read the facts for yourself) They went from a million barrels per day down to 600,000. It hurt Alaska a great deal and Palin’s current popularity there is well under 40%. Some polls have her down to 33%. (The latter somewhat skewed, but still shows the trend.)

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/businesstechnology/2014601450_alaska27.html

[2ndDivisionVet]

Again I will ask: Do you know how many US presidents we have elected with only a background as a House member? We’ve elected many governors, generals, senators and vice presidents. Do you know the number I’m looking for?

[imfrmdixie]

Huck, you and I have exchanged ideas before and I do respect your thoughts and writings but why would anyone that may aspire to a public office ever say they would not take into consideration that ground troops may have to be considered when an altercation has happened?

I went back and watched that video again. I had seen it when it was on the first time on TV but I wanted to see what I had missed. Anyone who has ever listened to the speeches that Palin gives knows she does not follow a polished format...she speaks from her mind and her heart. You need to watch her body movements and facial expressions when she is talking. When she was speaking about the troops she certainly didn’t look like that would be her first choice in this situation. She emphasized on “no fly zone” and “Gaddafi has to go”...but on that statement about troops...it was like a “oh, that’s not what I would WANT to do” kind of response...at least to me. It was my feeling she wanted to make it quite clear that anytime you put a choice to another leader that all options would be on the table.

[imfrmdixie]

“I like Palin but for that very reason I don’t think she’ll win the nomination.”

She will if we vote her in....if we don’t then we vote in “annuder like the udder” one....and, for me...that is a big ole “ain’t gonna happen to my vote”.

[2ndDivisionVet]

The Seattle Times?! REALLY?! Funny that you guys would use attacks against her from the lamestream media, that the big fat homosexual blogger Andrew Sullivan and loudmouth Hollyweird lefties Bill Maher, Roseann Barr, Margaret Cho, Aaron Sorkin and that crew would use. Who’s side are you on, pardner?

[E. Pluribus Unum]

If Sarah Palin is going to run for the Republican presidential nomination in 2012, she is sure going about it her own way.

If she did al Reuters way, they could have destroyed her by now.

She doesn't play their game, and it enrages them.

[PSYCHO-FREEP]

Abraham Lincoln was only a Congressman, he ran for the Senate but failed both times.

[Huck]

they would not take into consideration that ground troops may have to be considered when an altercation has happened?

An altercation didn't happen. Libya is embroiled in their own civil war. Mrs. Palin was calling for us to get involved in it. And yes, once you get entangled in something like that, it's difficult to rule anything out. That's what they call mission creep. You get sucked in deeper and deeper, like a gambler trying to win back his money on a losing night.

You and I both agree that Mrs. Palin wanted us involved in Libya's war and wouldn't rule out ground troops. I strongly disagree with her entire concept of US policy towards Libya. Her position is no different than Obama's, really, except that she'd execute that policy more aggressively.

A bad policy is a bad policy, whether it's executed aggressively or otherwise. We have no business in Libya. We don't even know who we're helping.

[2ndDivisionVet]

Unlike Governors Romney, Huckabee, Pawlenty and Speaker Gingrich, she has skin in the game. Her son, Specialist Track Palin, has already served in the Iraq war. No Romney has EVER served in the military, IIRC.