Sarah in 2012, Piper in 2036!!!
Posted on 06/05/2011 8:06:14 AM PDT by kristinn
At this point I am leaning towards Bachmann. But my real dream candidate is a man named Eric Greitens.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eric_Greitens Former Navy Seal, a White House Fellow under Pres. Bush, and a person who’s put together a very successful veterans’ support charity called “The Mission Continues.” Most inspirational person I’ve seen in decades - and someone who has done the work, not just talked the talk.
He’s my dream candidate for President.
Actually, I’d like to see Sarah Palin or Jim DeMint or Rick Perry get the nomination. Any of those three would be A-OK with me. Michelle Bachman, Marco Rubio, Herman Cain, Rick Santorum would be the next cut.
Any of those 7 would be better than President Obama — by a giant margin. And so would Mitt Romney, although he wouldn’t be my first choice, or even my 8th.
The only things that matter: Make Obama a 1-term president. Keep the house. Capture the Senate. Those are the end games and the only games.
After that, whoever gets in, we take the 2 x 4s and keep hitting the mules in the head until they learn the straight and narrow conservative path — or we get new mules.
-George
I just can’t see Mitt Romney winning the Presidency. But, then, my political predictions are almost always wrong.
“Revere was never intending to warn the other side.”
He absolutely did, to dissuade them and demoralize them.
“or a Sarah Palin nomination that absolutely GUARANTEES the reelection of Marxist Barack Hussein Obama?
Make your case that Palin “absolutely guarantees... Obama reelected...”
Oh, the same polling that guaranteed us that Reagan had no shot.
You can’t name a better conservative candidate and you haven’t.
“But my understanding is the *primary* purpose of Revere’s mission was to warn Americans of the advance of the British.”
So your simplified understanding of history disallows you to see the facts that Revere did warn the Brits to dissuade them and demoralize them from advancing?
Absurd.
“But my real dream candidate is a man named Eric Greitens.”
Ah, you’re embarrassed for the “Palin worshipers”....and I’m sure everybody is proud of your noble support for somebody that won’t get a half percent of the vote, so we can hand the Nation to the ObamaCommies...what a dipshit.
Right back at ya.’ I said that was my DREAM. You ignored my support of Bachmann, who’s actually *finished* serving her terms in Congress, and knows the ways of Washington.
You’re just going out of your way to be insulting, nasty and dismissive. You’re the dipshit in this conversation?
NO, he absolutely didn’t. He had to ride in such a way to keep his journey secret from the Royalists, until he’d warned Hancock and Adams.
The fact that the British ended up being “warned” in a metaphorical way that the colonists were prepared to fight was not the intention of Revere. It was an unexpected benefit.
We get it. You love Sarah so much that you’d ignore the facts, and insult your friends, in order to create a version of events that supports her errors. Why not just call her Dear Leader and be done with it. When support of Palin becomes a cult, it becomes dangerous to ALL of us, Libs and Conservatives alike.
Sarah in 2012, Piper in 2036!!!
rbmiller jr stated, in part:
*****
So your simplified understanding of history disallows you to see the facts that Revere did warn the Brits to dissuade them and demoralize them from advancing?
*****
Calif Conservative response:
*****
the only thing that’s absurd is your breathtaking inability to comprehend English, to wit — or in your case, to witless — the definition of the word “primary”, or, to expand matters, the general meaning of the phrase “primary purpose.”
*****
-George
Try looking at facts and putting your PDS aside.
Revere was stopped by British officers at gunpoint. He warned them that the Colonists were massed and ready to dissuade them from a quick attack.
Palin’s statement is right on the nailhead in that regard.
Your weak rhetorical flourish hasn’t changed the manner in which you are ignoring historical facts. Palin was correct. But, your agreeance with the media is noted.
That was an accidental event that happened on his ride. It was never his *intention* to get stopped by the British officers. It was not the reason or purpose that he rode. The reason he rode was to warn the Colonial revolutionaries, chiefly Hancock and Adams, and then to warn the residents of Concord of the approaching British regiment. He NEVER road with the intention of warning the British!
I understand that you love Sarah. But that doesn’t mean you need to rewrite history to defend her. She is allowed to be wrong about something that she learned in grade school. You sound like “My Palin, right or wrong.” When Bachmann, or anybody else, including myself id wrong on history, I’ll say it. But I am not wrong on this. Palin is.
By the way, to charge everyone who disagrees with Sarah Palin, or finds her facts in error, to be suffering from PDS is incredibly short-sighted on your part. You are turning off potential supporters by insisting that her backers accept everything she does, all her statements and actions, or be labeled crazy.
Sorry, that sounds like zealotry, rather than a thoughtfully considered advocacy.
“He NEVER road with the intention of warning the British!”
That is absolutely and objectively irrelevant since her comment wasn’t about his intention but what he did. Among the things he did was warn the British as a feign to give them pause in a quick attack.
If you weren’t so PDS you could see the objective facts versus what you want to see. lol.
You keep accusing everyone who criticizes your Dear Leader of PDS. Maybe the problem is YOUR blind uncritical allegiance to your goddess.
Palin answered the general question, “What did you do today, and what did you learn?” (man, there’s a GOTCHA question, eh?) by talking about how Revere warned the British that they couldn’t take away our arms by riding through the town ringing those bells and firing those warning shots.
1.) The purpose of Revere’s ride was NOT to warn the British. No where does she make ANY mention of his real purpose in getting on his horse - nowhere. So she misses out on the POINT of his ride.
2.) He did not “ride through the town.” He wasn’t even IN the town. He was in the country, on the opposite shore. He was waiting for the signal on lantern lights in the steeple of the Old North Church. He rode across open country.
3.) He fired no shots. He rang no bells.
Now, I understand that you are a Palin fanatic, apparently, and that the woman can speak and say no wrong, as far as you are concerned. But the rest of us who have not yet fallen under the spell of La Belle Sarah the Dear Leader, and we know what the real history is.
To me, her answer indicates that she goes into a situation where she is supposed to learn something and she totally misses the main points, instead noticing only the things that she already finds appealing - like gun rights. That, to me, is the sign of a person who shouldn’t be President - especially when she’s being pushed by apparent zealots who take everything she says as gospel.
Your rabid insistence on Palin’s being right about everything has just made me dislike her campaign even more. Maybe Palin’s own at times nutty supporters are driving some of the rest of us into PDS. We can’t afford another four years of yet ANOTHER President who ignores the salient facts in order to spin a story of the world they way they imagine it to be, not the way it is.
It may be a flourish and it may be weak — in your view ....
... Still ... it also doesn’t excuse you being a “glittering jewel of colossal ignorance” with regards to the definition of “primary purpose.”
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.