Posted on 12/04/2009 10:02:44 AM PST by pissant
Sarah Palin scrambled away from the birther movement last night after giving them a wink and a nod on a conservative radio talk show yesterday. Posting on her Facebook page at 1:16am, Palin writes that, "at no point – not during the campaign, and not during recent interviews – have I asked the president to produce his birth certificate or suggested that he was not born in the United States." She tries to dismiss her birther flirtation as just an acknowledgment of voters' right to know: "Voters have every right to ask candidates for information if they so choose. I’ve pointed out that it was seemingly fair game during the 2008 election for many on the left to badger my doctor and lawyer for proof that Trig is in fact my child."
Well ... three problems with her explanation.
First, here's what she said when asked if she would raise the birth certificate issue in a presidential campaign (emphasis mine):
I think the public rightfully is still making it an issue. I don't have a problem with that. I don't know if I would have to bother to make it an issue, because I think that members of the electorate still want answers.
The key word there is "rightfully," which in this context means that it is right--as in correct or proper--to ask the question. She didn't say that the public has the right to ask, she said that it's right for the public to ask. That's an Alaska-sized difference.
(Excerpt) Read more at usnews.com ...
Was Governor Palin threatened by Raila Odinga's favorite cousin?
I have noticed that many high profile Conservatives (Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, etc) tend to avoid any and all discussions on the Fraud In Chief's Constitutional validity.
Why do they avoid the issue altogether?
She ought to know by now that that winking schtick just makes her look un-serious.
Actually, her use of the word “rightfully” was appropriate. There is enough confusion about what has been offered that a reasonable person WOULD be right to ask.
It is pretty clear, and they are just looking for anything they can find. Our understanding of info also changes over time. A lot of AGW scientists are changing sides right now, as they should. They are not “flip-floppers”.
I agree but I’m okay with her latest statement, too.
But the SRM dissects her every word....amazing. If they paid 1/100th as much attention to say...Climategate or the UN or the President that they do to her, we’d have world peace by now.
“She ought to know by now that that winking schtick just makes her look un-serious.”
###
Just admit it.
This hit piece gave you a troll boner, didn’t it?
Because they realize that it's counterproductive to associate themselves, and conservatives generally, with that sort of crackpottery.
Exactly...she should have emphasized that what’s good for the goose is good for the gander, i.e. since people demanded Trig’s BC, Obama’s BC clearly a reasonable request.
Sounds like maybe some “handlers” got to Sarah again. If so, she should trust her own gut because her instincts appear to be those of the majority of Americans.
I don’t know, but I took it exactly the way she described it.
But the only thing missing here is your claim that Hunter would never make suck a claim and is the only REAL conservative worthy of being considered for a leadership role. :-) Thanks for your inspirational input once again Pissant. We can always count on you to try and wreck any none Hunter candidate.
It is not appropriate to accuse pissant of being a troll.
From the article:
>>The key word there is “rightfully,” which in this context means that it is right—as in correct or proper—to ask the question.<<
My response: It is.
I’m not a birther, but I have followed this thing and one thing is clear, the actions of Obama are suspicious as he##. It was when that became clear to me that I was interested in where this went and started asking questions, and rightfully so.
And...uh...why would it NOT be right for the public to want a real birth certificate from a Presidential candidate, dear elite columnist?
yeah, especially over the radio, dude. Winking over radio waves makes a candidate ‘unserious’. What the hell?
>>Sounds like maybe some “handlers” got to Sarah again.<<
I don’t think so. I think her latest statement is simply very much a clarification, to KEEP people from jumping to conclusions about what she “might have” meant.
>>Sounds like maybe some “handlers” got to Sarah again.<<
I don’t think so. I think her latest statement is simply very much a clarification, to KEEP people from jumping to conclusions about what she “might have” meant.
The two statements are in harmony.
“troll boner”
I think that deserves to be an FR classic.
Sorry Pissy, your latest attack & twisting of words of Sarah Palin is blatantly obvious.
Your losing cause of pushing someone named hunter is a failure. Wake-up, smell the coffee and get some freakin' common sense.
What is the “flip-flop” exactly? I see lots of inferring in order to get to from the flip to the flop.
For a politician, the birth certificate issue is like trying to pick up a turd by the clean end. It IS an issue that the public should “rightfully” raise, but if a politician does so they’re going to be unfairly smeared. My only disappointment is that of all people, she ought to have learned that by now. Which is, I’m sure, exactly what she’s telling herself right about now...
She didn’t wink. That is how the media is trying to play it, and you fell right into their trap. Read what she was quoted as saying, without the editorial emendations.
There have been other serious politicians who have said that it is reasonable to ask the President why he will not show his birth certificate, without saying that they believe that he was born anywhere other than Hawaii. She did no more than that.
Unfortunately, the media likes to portray her as a naif, and even well-meaning people don’t always realize that this is going on.
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.