Posted on 05/12/2010 9:56:42 PM PDT by Steelfish
Palin Chastises Illinois High School For Boycotting Arizona May 12, 2010
Sarah Palin took on officials of an Illinois high school for canceling a trip to Arizona by its girls' basketball team because of the controversial new immigration law. She also maintained her support for oil drilling despite the massive spill in the Gulf of Mexico. “Keeping the girls’ basketball team off the court for political reasons? Those are fighting words,” the former Alaska governor and GOP vice presidential candidate said during a speech Wednesday in Rosemont, Ill., a Chicago suburb.
Noting that Highland Park High School has allowed student trips to China, Palin asked whether school officials know "how they treat women in China." School officials said the Arizona immigration law that makes it a crime to be in the country illegally and requires police to check the immigration status of suspects was not “aligned with our beliefs and values.” Palin encouraged the team to defy authority.
“Go rogue, girls,” she said, playing off the title of her book about being John McCain’s running mate in 2008. On the campaign trail, fans often greeted her with, “Drill, baby, drill” to signal their agreement with her support for aggressive oil exploration.
(Excerpt) Read more at latimesblogs.latimes.com ...
Sarah is good. Really good.
So much for the ‘Sarah supports amnesty’ crowd.
Haha, go Sarah, go! What a ridiculous thing for this school to do.
LOL! Are school administrators the stupidest people alive or what?
BOYCOTT HIGHLAND PARK, ILLINOIS
Somewhere there is a total disconnect from realilty for these "officials." Possibly they are throw-offs from the Chicago mob scene. The fact is Arizona's law mirrors federal law. Also, if a person is in the country illegally, they have broken the law. They have committed a crime. When did we take a side road down from our committment to law and order?
Is there still an oil spill? The MSM isn’t reporting on it anymore.
Excellent statement Gov Palin!
She's turning out to be nothing more than the anti-Obama, who will say whatever she needs to get a hooray from the crowd she is talking to at that moment.
So sad, but I'm glad she vetted herself.
I was there tonight and she was pretty good at giving the “lame stream media”, as she called them, their sound bites for the night.
But she not only suggested that the girls “Go Rogue”, but that she would try to drum up support for them any way she can.
This quote from the article shows how libs just don’t get it: “School officials said the Arizona immigration law that makes it a crime to be in the country illegally”.
As far as the “drill, baby, drill”, she prefaced it all by recalling Alaska’s experience with the Exxon spill, sympathizing with the effects it has on the environment, economy, and ultimately the people. She did call for the strictest regulations on companies drilling as a protection for economic reasons.
Her most memorable attribute of her speech was invoking President Ronald Reagan and his roots to Illinois. “If Illinois could produce one such as him, then surely they can lead the effort to bring us back to those Conservative principles he stood for. The whole nation is watching, to see which way Illinois will take.” (UPV - uptoolate’s paraphrased version)
Sounds like Palin is on her game. Those comments remind me what a great job she did in her GOP convention speech. I dropped in briefly on the WGN News tonight, and they were calling Palin a “controversial” political figure. Bet they would never call their hometown boy Obama a “controversial” president even though his poll numbers are sinking.
Who is your candidate of choice for 2012?
She endorsed McCain out of mutual respect (99 percent of Americans wouldn't even know who she is if not for McCain), and she endorsed Carly because Carly's probably the best we can hope for in LaLa land, just as pro-choice Scott Brown's probably the best we could hope for in Massachusetts.
Jim DeMint or James Inhofe as VP, and Paul Ryan as a wildcard right now for President.
Palin is a political monster who is into her own fame.
So that means she should compromise her supposed values to endorse Juan in a state where the immigration issue has finally boiled over into actual policy? Sorry, she lost me by compromising her supposed values.
So the real question should be: Why is your newspaper representing the minority viewpoint?
A shameless plug. Yikes.
You’re so wrong about Palin. The guys you mention are alright but they are too afraid to call out Obama and never specifically call out the media. She does.
I don’t think I’m wrong about Palin, and I was very excited to have her as McLame’s running mate. Her actions since then have disappointed me, and she’s lost me with these RINO endorsements. Calling out Obama is easy. Sticking with conservatives isn’t in the GOP. She has failed on the latter.
Ok, all due respect on your take. I’m hoping she can win you over in 2012.
Unlike you, Palin lives in the real world. Get a clue. DeVore is a loser. Eric Erickson who was the first to call out Palin on the Fiorina endorsement is backing up now and admitting it makes alot of sense. He is trying to cover his butt for being an a$$ by saying DeVore needs to make up the gap between him and Fiorina in the next two weeks, or he with throw is support to her, but this is cosmetic. DeVore doesn't have the resources, the staff or the personality to do this. So, all he is doing is insuring that Campbell becomes the nominee. And here you are just yapping without even analyzing the situation. All knee jerk and no real thought.
Face it you are just an anti-Palin person. Thats the fact of you. The why, is hard to know but there are many here.. mostly Paulbots and Romneybots.. aggg.
Chicago is more dangerous than war torn Afghanistan.
Wouldn’t be if they chose to focus on important issues.
We heard the same crap when the GOP elitists insisted on pushing Arnold instead of supporting McClintock.
I have warned bunches of people that are all gushing about Scott Brown, that he is a RINO and we will regret his election over and over, but I am still glad he won.
Letting the Best being the enemy of the good is a continual theme you harp back on over and over. Even Kirk, who is a complete RINO, is better than the crook he is running against. I will be glad to regret his election too.
U do realize that James Inhofe also endorsed Carly Fiorina so you just contradicted yourself
Palin is the only conservative with the balls to come out and say what most of us think.
She’s like a female Rush Limbaugh without being bombastic, a female Glenn Beck without the histrionics, a female Mark Levine without the temper tantrums, all rolled into one.
History repeats itself.
Remember how Nixon resurrected his political career?
By “earning” political capital by endorsing other winning candidates who then returned the favor when he ran for President in 1968 and then won.
Palin is following the same proven playbook.
She continues to prove her detractors wrong and is likely going to be the POTUS in January, 2013
She continues to prove her detractors wrong and is likely going to be the POTUS in January, 2013
- - - - - - - -
I don’t see anyone else on the playing field. Romney got booed in Utah of all places when he tried to save Bennett. DeMint is a great asset in the Senate, but he won’t draw much of a crowd even if they give away free beer and pizza. Newt is history and Barbour doesn’t have the charisma. Jeb is after all, a Bush. The rest of the Republican governors are playing in the minors when compared to Sarah.
We can differ with some of her endorsements, but a leader is supposed to lead. She may be playing heads I win, tails you lose. If her more moderate picks defeat their conservative opponent, they will be indebted to Sarah and will want to play on her team in 2012. If the conservatives defeat her picks, has she really lost?
Iowa will be interesting. There’s no way Sarah can work the coffee shop circuit without stopping traffic for blocks around.
The public will be begging her to run.
Jim DeMint or James Inhofe as VP, and Paul Ryan as a wildcard right now for President.Who is your candidate of choice for 2012? 14 posted on May 13, 2010 1:30:19 AM EDT by toddausauras
I think you are wildly optimistic about the political realities. You can't beat somebody with nobody, and if history is any guide even a senator is "nobody" when it comes to unseating a sitting president. No senator has ever done it. Indeed, only one senator (Harding) has ever even defeated a governor for the presidency. Senators win only when running against other senators, or VPs (VP not being an executive position any more than senator is).Palin is a political monster who is into her own fame.The consequence is that most "presidential timber" is illusory, and we should be considering only sitting or recent governors. That puts Palin on a very short list.
Is it actually possible to go from 28-yo housewife/businesswoman to "political monster" - Republican political monster - in the space of 18 years?IMHO political monsters don't start their political careers at the age of 28 - and certainly don't start them by running for town councilwoman, and then mayor, of a jerkwater town 500 miles north of nowhere.
And political monsters all (except LBJ) have law degrees.
She is not in politics so she can talk and call out all she wants.
I am not condoning the Republicans for not calling Obama to the carpet, although I do believe that DeMint has and so has Paul Ryan.
Quite frankly, IMHO, she does more good as a spokesperson than she would being an elected official.
The oil spill was fixed when it became known how much BP had donated to BO.
That's what I'm talking about in my #33, when I say, "You can't beat somebody with nobody!"Sarah is capable of self-deprecating humor (I'm sure, without thinking of a specific example) - but she won't be saying anything like Mo Udall did after his attempt to run in the Democratic primary in New Hampshire. He said that he walked into a country store in New Hampshire and said, "I'm Mo Udall and I'm running for president" - to which one of the customers in the store replied, "We know - we were just laughing about that!"
Sarah is, unambiguously, a contender. She's a fresh face, on the one hand, and she is experienced and known at the national level on the other. Unlike Romney, she doesn't have a socialized health care plan with her name on it - and unlike any other candidate she is able to actually speak out against Obama.Because Obama has brown skin on the outside, the boys are all too afraid of being called "racist" to be able to call out the black heart that beats within the enemy of constitutional liberty now residing in the White House.
A great idea, and Sarah has the cred to talk about girl's basketball. But of course even if she raised the money to take the team to Arizona, she would be setting herself up for failure because every member of the team, and particularly every parent thereof, would have veto power over her plan. And that's too much exposure to risk, IMHO.I suppose she could get uniforms for them, assuming she had all the starters and their parents on board - but any of them who went would be exposed tremendous pressure when they got back, and they know it. It's a shame even Sarah can't pull that off, but "a man's gotta know his limits."
I’m not anti-Palin. Criticizing her for endorsing RINOs over more conservative candidates is perfectly acceptable.
Blind devotion to a candidate is what scares me. I see similarities between Obamabots and the Palin Posse. I live in reality, where politicians have to earn my trust by their actions.
Blind devotion to a candidate is what scares me. I see similarities between Obamabots and the Palin Posse. I live in reality, where politicians have to earn my trust by their actions.
I see you write these words but deeds speak louder than words and your trail of posts is anti-palin, not anti-RINO.
Second, by focusing exclusively on two endorsements you have missed and entire list of other crucial endorsements that have been literally earth shaking. Like causing Obey to surrender without a fight. Like heading off a destructive Minnesota primary battle between two good conservatives.
In California, even Erik Erickson of Red State has recanted his vitriol about Palin's endorsing Fiorina because he looked at it again and saw she was dead right.
Now if you aren't a Palin hater and you are someone who can understand how even a RINO like Scott Brown is a good guy to have in the Senate at this point in time, then you will rethink your whole approach to these questions.
Go to C4P and watch Palin's speech in Illinois last night and get an education.
Folks around her are defending her because frankly, she needs defending against the sort of crap you have been spewing. And also, in the long run, she has been right more often than not, so it has been worth the time to pay attention.
She is not perfect, but that is an insane standard. Anybody to casts themselves as perfect is a liar. What she is doing is building a political movement and the tone was very different in Illinois as the Republican party is now being drawn to her leadership.
My guess is that inside of the next 12 to 14 months, you won't be able to find much difference between the Party and Palin because she will be its de facto leader. And in this, you can be assured that if you are a purist, she is going to piss you off many more times.
Because Obama has brown skin on the outside, the boys are all too afraid of being called "racist" to be able to call out the black heart that beats within the enemy of constitutional liberty now residing in the White House.
Winner of the most insightful comment I have seen today.
If she is the GOP nominee in 2012, I will vote for her without thinking twice. I stomached McCain because of Palin, but the idea that Sarah is somehow indebted to McCain is absurd to me. The McCain camp crushed her after the election, and Juan sat silent and let it happen without immediately condemning the nonsense being spewed toward Palin.
As a side note, I find the notion that anyone who criticizes Palin is automatically a fanboi of Paul or Romney utterly ridiculous. I've never posted about Paul, other than him being a kook, and if you think I'm tough on Palin, you clearly haven't read my posts on Romney (and Scott Brown, to take it a step further).
She isn't perfect, yet you must lash out at fellow FReepers who point out her political imperfections. That doesn't really make sense, and me having to defend myself on FR for not liking Palin endorsing RINOs is a tad ironic.
It’s not criticism of Palin that is the problem.
It’s when the criticism is leveled by the same band of spammers over and over again, some of who support other candidates that that have also supported RINOs.
Ala DeMint, an excellent conservative, yet he endorsed Myth Romney.
BTW, you ignore her endorsements of conservative candidates. Rand Paul and Michele Bachmann.
I care when any so-callled leader of the conservative movement endorses RINOs. Why do you care that I care?
“And, frankly, it is still not clear that McClintock could have won.”
Anyone that the GOP got behind was going to win. Davis didn’t have a chance of staying in office. McClintock was instrumental in getting Davis recalled and had experience as an elected official. Arnold had done nothing to further the recall and had never been elected to anything. Had the GOP elitists backed McClintock he would have been Governor, and moreover he would have been a good one since fiscal matters are his specialty. He’s kind of boring that way, but that’s what this State needs.
Arnold was the stalking horse for a group of very wealthy, socially liberal Republican connivers who wanted to reduce the influence of traditional conservatives in the CA GOP. They organized themselves as “The New Majority”. They had the big money and Arnold had the name ID, and more importantly Arnold was willing to be their front man. This New Majority group has managed to stay in the background and let Arnold take all the heat, but Arnold’s policies are theirs. I don’t know for certain but I strongly suspect that they support Fiorina and Whitman, two wealthy and socially liberal GOP candidates. You vote for those two at your own risk. I certainly won’t.
I don’t think it was monetary or physical support she was referring to. There would be no problem raising funds for these girls. I think the support she is offering is a national exposure to the abuse of these girls for political reasons. Talk radio has picked picked up the battle cry now. Emails are flooding in. Phone lines are being used. Reputations will be at stake.
Kinda like a reverse Sharpton maneuver.
Uh. Davis wasn't running. It was Cruz Bustamante who actually got twice as many votes as McClintock.
Lets get with the facts rather than your fantasies about what might have been. McClintock wasn't able to win California wide office and he knew it after that election cycle. But you apparently still haven't gotten that message.
In the immediately previous election cycle the Unions took over the California Democrat party and booted out almost whole cloth the old existing Democrat leadership. They have been enormously effective at maintaining that control and the dominance of the Democrat party on the local level of most of the major population centers. This is what broke Arnold's bluster. That and Arnold's Democrat family, too.
He capitulated. Hard to imagine that but after a couple of years tilting at the windmill he cried uncle and has been pretty much useless since. But, those were different times during the Recall Election.
Nevertheless, McClintock never really had a chance. Sorry.
Your mode of operation is not pointing out issues or imperfections. It is just bashing. Plain and simple and as you profess to not have an agenda you expose that you actually do. When we look to find fault, we inevitably do, but take the "log" out of your own eye, before you criticize the "mote" in Palin's.
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.