Palin supports McCain '100 percent' [Palin pushes back at TMZ 'disprespect' meme]

Politico ^ | Dec. 16, 2009 | Mike Allen

[Al B.]

Declaring that she “was honored and proud to run with him,” former Alaska governor Sarah Palin pushed back hard Wednesday against a report that she had disrespected Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) by blacking out his name on a sun visor she wore on vacation.

The website TMZ accused Palin of “a frontal attack on Sen. John McCain” during a Hawaii vacation this week: “Sarah chose to wear a visor from her campaign -- a visor that was emblazoned with the former presidential candidate's name ... that is, until Palin redacted McCain's name with a black marker.”

But Palin said in a statement to POLITICO that she was just trying to “be incognito” -- to go unrecognized and shield her children and husband, Todd, from paparazzi.

The hotel where she was staying had to chase away five photographers, a friend said.

Palin said in the statement to POLITICO: “I am so sorry if people took this silly incident the wrong way. I adore John McCain, support him 100 percent and will do everything I can to support his reelection. As everyone knows, I was honored and proud to run with him. And Todd and I were with him in D.C. just a week ago. So much for trying to be incognito."

The Palins were taking a break from a three-and-a-half-week book tour for her million-copy-selling memoir, “Going Rogue: An American Life.” Palin has signed more than 59,000 books -- an average of 1,750 per stop -- and has traveled more than 19,000 miles by plane and bus. She has spent 115 hours -- or 4.8 days -- signing books in 33 cities in 25 states. Her stops have included five military bases.

[w. Seymour]

Yes, but you don’t know how her statements will pay off for conservative principles in the future yet.

[rabscuttle385]

Well, in the meantime, pal, your boy Obama will give us nationalized health care and cap and trade.

Bush expanded Medicare, which is a form of Socialized health care.

And McCain *IS* the original cap-and-trade pusher.

So your argument doesn't stick at all.

RINOs are just as dangerous, if not more dangerous, than Democrats because conservatives within the Republican Party fail to oppose them with as much zeal as they oppose liberals within the Democrat Party.

This is a pro-Palin conservative site. The majority here are in agreement with me on this. You are the odd man out. Slither back to DU or the Ron Paul forums or whatever rock you crawled out from under.

No, you get lost, RINO retread.

You've been here for just over a month and have been actively attacking other Freepers as "DU trolls" left and right, which is awfully suspicious for a newbie such as yourself, considering that you regularly defend RINOs and bash conservatives. In fact, your first post on FR was an attack on Doug Hoffman.

[DoughtyOne]

Look, this isn’t a tough call. It’s not based on what the ramifications are. The classification is based on which category I mentioned, it belongs in.

One of the two statements is true. I realize you don’t want to admit it, but honestly, one of those statements is true. And one of the opinions expressed, represents truth.

It isn’t neither. You know that.

Thanks for arguing your position. Later...

[Mozilla]

Well I am giving her some slack at the moment. She was caught between a rock and a hard place after the flap occurred. She didn’t want to offend anyone this early before she even got going on 2012. She is carefully choosing her battles.

The problem as I see it, which I can see why it would cause the people on here to go after her, is why did she even wear a McCain visor anyways? I can understand why then she would get a backlash, especially with her statement added in afterwords.

As I figure it is the same old debate in the past year about whether it was worth voting for McCain or third party.

As you saw last year, unless you were blind, Palin did everything she could to help McCain win. She still hit the campaign hard in her book because they misused her.

But yet she was supportive of McCain. There was no other choice in the matter. He picked her as her VP and she said yes to running for him. She was not the name on the top of the ticket.

Therefore, she wouldn’t be where she was without him. But having said that McCain is a Rhino. And I sometimes have said that it might have been better for Palin if maybe she hadn’t run as VP and had not accepted. Seeing how she lost, the libs go after her, it forced her to resign as governor, and we still had Obama elected anyways.

Another reason is that then it wouldn’t have split the conservatives like it is doing now. Many conservatives, like me, voted for McCain because of Palin and then danced around the issue of McCain being a rino because we voted for Palin and we liked Palin.

Likewise there was the crowd that convinced themselves they voted for the lesser of two evils since Obama is so bad. We had to do everything to defeat him, but we still lost. To which, Glenn Beck added fuel to the fire by saying McCain was worse than Obama.

He was right in the sense that Obama mobilized us to take action. Something that might not have happened under McCain. Especially since Palin would have been the VP.

But with all that being said. Palin put herself then is a no-win situation. She will now always be tied to the 2008 campaign. And therefore, will that can be used against her.

She was hoping the change McCain’s mind on several issues had they won. We were all hoping McCain would see the light if he had won. But frankly, there in lies the problem.

Palin is going to forced to defend McCain at some point. or the rift between them.

which brings me back to the fact that if McCain had never chosen and went with say Pawlenty or Romney. Then Palin would have been better off and I am sure nobody who voted for Palin would have voted McCain.

Thus it would have made thins simpler for us all. For now it even makes us looks like hypocrites.

[rabscuttle385]

Yes, but you don’t know how her statements will pay off for conservative principles in the future yet.

You mean like how offering amnesty to illegals was supposed to create a "permanent Republican majority"?

Karl Rove, is that you?

[w. Seymour]

Where did I say that?

[Chunga]

I am perfectly comfortable with how I voted in 2008, and I would do it again if necessary.

Yes. And again you would get

Sotomayor
The push for Socialized Medicine
The push for Cap And Trade
Announcing the date of the end of the War In Afghanistan to Al Qaeda and The Taliban
A pro-abortion platform
Statements confirming belief in the constitution as a living document
Blackmail...threatening to close a Nebraska military base for Nelson's non-support of the healthcare bill
Closing Guantanamo Bay
Trying terrorists in court in NYC
An 8 Trillion Dollar Bailout Plan

All of which are obviously in accordance with your "principles"

Guf-effing-faw

[AuntB]

“I haven’t even said I won’t support her. Yet some people have jumped to conclusions here based on their seeming neurosis.”

Exactly. I have done two things...worked my butt off for Palin during the election AND since posted HER words...HERS. Yet, I’ve been slandered, called every indecent name thinkable, threatened and lied about. I’m beginning to think Sarah’s FR fans are out to get her destroyed completely. Another thing...those who call us ‘liars’ for posting her words about immigration have mostly proven themselves to be soft on the issue, to say the least....figure that one out.

[Chunga]

Supporting RINOs against conservatives

Who's the conservative? Hayworth hasn't declared.

[rbmillerjr]

According to Webster’s Dictionary a fact is “anything that is done or happens; anything actually existent; any statement strictly true; truth; reality.”

Three examples of facts that are concrete and that could be documented include:

1.The house was painted on November 18, 1999.
2.Today is Saturday.
3.My son had a temperature of one hundred and two degrees this morning.
Whereas an opinion is defined as “indicating a belief, view, sentiment, conception.”
Obvious indicators of opinion are when sentences include words such as:

“Generally, it is thought” , “I believe that”, “It is a sad day when.”
For example, how the three facts above can be changed to opinions would be to add a belief or view. For example:
• The house was painted recently on November 18, 1999, so it looks as good as new.
• Today is Saturday and Mark always sleeps in on Saturdays, so that is why he is late for the game.
• There was no way for me to go to school because my son had a temperature of one hundred and two degrees this morning.
Sometimes it is challenging to tell the facts and opinions apart. For example, is the following a fact or an opinion?
“Abraham Lincoln was the most eloquent writer of all the U.S. Presidents.”
This is an opinion, but you have to know that eloquent is a descriptive word to for this to become clear. Descriptive words are subjective, or state someone’s opinion. It can become unclear how to separate fact and opinion when many people hold the same opinion. This is when it becomes important to understand what the word bias means.
A bias is an opinion or an attitude we have for or against something. A bias usually stems from our feelings rather than from rational thought. What is very important to realize is that ALL of us are biased. We are biased for or against certain people, activities, and ideas. We become biased because certain people, activities, or ideas do not appeal to us at some level. Of equal importance to realize is that we have “good biases” as well, that is we favor certain people, activities, or ideas. In these cases, our biases are still irrational, just like our negative ones. (Chapter 6: Recognizing fact, Opinion, Bias, and Propaganda, p.214)

Most of the time we keep our biases inside and use them to decide who to vote for, what to study in school, and how we want to appear in public. Other times, however, people can let their bias or opinions guide them to do dangerous acts. Issues such as racism, gun control, abortion, and patriotism provoke many people to act on their biases and do things that harm others. As long as biases are peacefully shared, there is little harm. But, when they are uncontrolled, strong biases can bring out anger and create hatred toward those who disagree. That is when facts and opinions become very challenging to separate.

Many of our biases are not based on fact or reasoned judgement but on opinions handed down to us by parents, teachers, and friends. Unfortunately, we don’t always take the time to examine the source of our biases, and many of us carry unhealthy opinions and prejudices because of it.

(Chapter 5/Distinguishing Fact and Opinion, p. 224)

Below is a list of incomplete sentences. Complete each one with the first word that comes to mind. Don’t stop to evaluate what you write or change your first response. If you can’t think of a word or phrase, skip it and go on to the next sentence.
• Teachers are ___________________________________________.
• Mothers are ____________________________________________.
• Democrats are __________________________________________.
• Communists are _________________________________________.
• Babies are ______________________________________________.
• Welfare recipients are _____________________________________.
• Elderly people are ________________________________________.
• Protestants are ___________________________________________.
• My neighbors are _________________________________________.
• Republicans are __________________________________________.
• Lawyers are _____________________________________________.
• Girl Scouts are ___________________________________________.
• Football players are _______________________________________.
• Jewish people are _________________________________________.

Reread what your answers. How many are based on facts and which are based on opinions? Can you tell? Do you ever wonder where you formed your biases?

[The Comedian]

If you can’t think of a word or phrase, skip it and go on to the next sentence...

The objective answer to all of them is "Screwed under Obama".

Frowning takes 68 muscles.
Smiling takes 6.
Pulling this trigger takes 2.
I'm lazy.

[Chunga]

Because she supports "100 percent" a Vichy RINO, in spite of his left-wing, anti-conservative record and his efforts to promote amnesty, to muzzle free speech, and to impose a cap-and-tax system.

Because she supports "100 percent" a Vichy RINO, despite all the hoopla about a REAL conservative entering the primary against the aforementioned Vichy RINO.

Supporting RINOs against conservatives...isn't that something Party hacks like Newt "Scozzafava" Gingrich do?

As for me, just like the owner of Free Republic,

"If she decides to run, I’ll be supporting her one hundred percent."

[DoughtyOne]

Well I am giving her some slack at the moment. She was caught between a rock and a hard place after the flap occurred. She didn’t want to offend anyone this early before she even got going on 2012. She is carefully choosing her battles.  One of my hopes for Sarah, is that she will develop top notch debate techniques.  That can help with the press.  She blurted out too much informaiton.   She should have stopped at the point she explained that this was the only hat available, and didn't want to wear something political that day.  "Don't read anything more into this than that, thank you for coming..." walk away.

The problem as I see it, which I can see why it would cause the people on here to go after her, is why did she even wear a McCain visor anyways? I can understand why then she would get a backlash, especially with her statement added in afterwords.  Look, she was on the ticket.  I don't have a problem with her wearing a hat that was left over.  If it said McCain/Palin on it, so what.  I agree that she said too much.  It was off the cuff, and she may not have meant it like it sounded.  My emphasis, was that it was an unfortunate comment, and would lead folks to wonder if there would be another shoe to drop in the upcoming months.  That's all.  Defending my displeasure at the specific comment, made it sound like I was much more upset with her than I actually was.  Was I right to address the issue.  Why sure.

As I figure it is the same old debate in the past year about whether it was worth voting for McCain or third party.  As it extrapolates out, you're right.  I agree.

As you saw last year, unless you were blind, Palin did everything she could to help McCain win. She still hit the campaign hard in her book because they misused her.  I have defended her running with him, because it couldn't make the ticket more RINOIish.  If anything it would make it less so.  Moderation was what that ticket desperately needed, and Palin was absolutely the right choice.  Her joining him to moderate the ticket, is a whole different animal than backing him against a decent Conservative.

But yet she was supportive of McCain. There was no other choice in the matter. He picked her as her VP and she said yes to running for him. She was not the name on the top of the ticket.  And that's why I couldn't vote for the ticket.  I explained who McCain was, and I got out of the way.  I could never vote for a man who said we have nothing to fear from Obama as president, and that the Democrat party has good values.  Look, if that says I'm deeply flawed, then so be it.  My concience wouldn't let me vote for him.

Therefore, she wouldn’t be where she was without him. But having said that McCain is a Rhino. And I sometimes have said that it might have been better for Palin if maybe she hadn’t run as VP and had not accepted. Seeing how she lost, the libs go after her, it forced her to resign as governor, and we still had Obama elected anyways.  I think those are valid concerns.  What McCain had hoped for, IMO, was for Sarah to help him get elected, then to be jetesoned to the Lyndon Johnson rumble seat for four years.  It didn't turn out that way.  She sparked a firestorm of support for herself, and John was forevermore relegated to being second to her.

Another reason is that then it wouldn’t have split the conservatives like it is doing now. Many conservatives, like me, voted for McCain because of Palin and then danced around the issue of McCain being a rino because we voted for Palin and we liked Palin.  I get it.  I understand.  I'm not going to fault you for it.  You did what you thought you needed to day, and who am I to say whether you were right or I was.  Both options stunk to high heavens.  Imagine the damage to Conservatism's image John McCain would have inflicted by his actions.  Would that have been better, him destroying the perception of our brand evern further?  It's a real quandry IMO.

Likewise there was the crowd that convinced themselves they voted for the lesser of two evils since Obama is so bad. We had to do everything to defeat him, but we still lost. To which, Glenn Beck added fuel to the fire by saying McCain was worse than Obama.  If you think of the Conservative Brand, who could do more damge to it?  Obama can only destroy the Leftist's brand.  McCain is the one who could rule from the Left on many issues, thereby confusing folks as to what Conservatives really believed in.  Don't forget, the media would have described John McCain as a Conservative during his term in office.

He was right in the sense that Obama mobilized us to take action. Something that might not have happened under McCain. Especially since Palin would have been the VP.  Oh, absolutely.  We would have been having this discussion weekly under a McCain presidency.  And that would have destroyed ANY ability to mobilize against bad policy.  Palin would have been muzzled to boot.

But with all that being said. Palin put herself then is a no-win situation. She will now always be tied to the 2008 campaign. And therefore, will that can be used against her.  Palin conducted herself with utmost propriety during that period.  She was a good soldier, operated in a positive manner for the ticket.  She was a good team player, when the play called for a conservative half-back.  I am proud of her performance last year.

She was hoping the change McCain’s mind on several issues had they won. We were all hoping McCain would see the light if he had won. But frankly, there in lies the problem.  Yes, one only need look at the MIA issue vs MFN for Vietnam to realize how far that would have gone.  John McCain wouldn't listen to anyone back then.  He knew right, and everyone else was wrong.  The MIA families and veterans groups will NEVER forget that.  So why should we think he's listen to Sarah?  Well, we don't.

Palin is going to forced to defend McCain at some point. or the rift between them.  When asked earlier this year if he would back Palin for president, he declined.  If I were her, I would state that John was my friend, and I would not be making any statements pro or con his campaign.  That would convey all that needed to be said.  I'm not asking that she take part in gutting this old bastard.  He needs to go, and she shouldn't tarnish her position by being involved in it one way or the other.  I might change my mind over time, but that's how I see it now.

which brings me back to the fact that if McCain had never chosen and went with say Pawlenty or Romney. Then Palin would have been better off and I am sure nobody who voted for Palin would have voted McCain.  I'm sure that's true.  He wouldn't have gotten nearly as many votes.  This did play out well for Palin though.  Her visibility was raised.  She gained national stature.  She is well poised to convert that into a run for the presidency.  I'm glad to see that.  And as long as she minds her ps and qs, I'll continue to be.

Thus it would have made thins simpler for us all. For now it even makes us looks like hypocrites.  It was important to moderate McCain after he obtained the nomination.  There's no disgrace in trying to do that.  There's no disgrace in calling a spade a spade, and explaining what John actually is today.  It was a mistake to nominate him.  We coudln't help it.  Now it's time to make sure we nominate someone better.  And to the extent we can let Palin know that RINOism is not an option, our chances of getting the right wing governance our nation so desperately needs, is enhanced.

Thanks for the comments.

[stephenjohnbanker]

“Supporting RINOs against conservatives...isn’t that something Party hacks like Newt “Scozzafava” Gingrich do? “

The only difference is that McCain is FAR more powerful than Scozzbag. McCain is public enemy # 1 in the Republican party.

[DoughtyOne]

I know. It’s simply a fact of life here, these dynamics of self destruction. If someone said something about my candidate I didn’t like, I’d find out if the candidate deserved the comments or not, then forgo defending the indefensible.

“It’s unfortunate that he/she said this. I don’t agree with everything they say. I wish they hadn’t said this.”

Just how damning is that? It defuses argument. It allows people to move on. It’s based on realty.

Thanks for your comments AuntB. Hope you have a great weekend.

[DoughtyOne]

“I have stated that Palin made a mistake. You have stated that she has been politically savvy and wise.”

If you wish to state, that neither of these statements is true, then be my guest.

Otherwise, one of these statements is true, and once again you have not been able to avoid reality.

[rabscuttle385]

"If she decides to run, I’ll be supporting her one hundred percent."

And as I have publicly stated, if he wants to do that, it is his right.

It is also my right to refuse, based on her flagrant support of McCain in the 2010 Arizona Senate GOP primary election.

[rabscuttle385]

Chunga...

Sotomayor was let out for a vote by Lindsey Graham.

Medicare Part D, aka an expansion of Socialized medicine, was pushed by Bush and the Republican Party.

Cap and trade was pushed by McCain.

Closing Guantanamo Bay was supported by McCain and Graham.

The bailout plan was pushed by McCain, Obama, and Bush.

As for the rest of the items, McCain himself said that the Democrat Party is a “fine party” and that he had no problem with any of its values.

So as far as I am concerned, you can stuff it.

[rabscuttle385]

Who's the conservative? Hayworth hasn't declared.

YET.

He has gone on the record that he is seriously considering declaring but that no decision will be made until after the New Year.

The problem now is that Hayworth will have to consider going up against not just McCain but Palin.

The fact that you're too stupid to realize that McCain is using Palin as a political human shield (and that she appears to be willingly going along with such a despicable act) is just disgusting, but not unexpected from a knee-jerk Republicrat hack like yourself.

[Jim Robinson]

Sarah Palin is no John McCain. Thank God!