Posted on 08/12/2011 6:11:05 PM PDT by ejdrapes
What she should have said is “I stand by my statement. There is nobody on the face of this Earth that could do less damage to the United States of America than Barack Obama has done. I’d support a ham sandwich against Obama. Anyone But Obama.”
Thereby standing by her statement like a real, confident leader yet equating Romney to a ham sandwich thereby appeasing her supporters.
This “what I meant was” stuff is not encouraging.
You are a PDS addled idiot. What IS your dysfunction?
I never would have interpreted what she said as endorsing or preferring ROmney. I agree with Palin that the headline was misleading, in that it suggested she picked Romney, when the reporter could have said ANY of the republican names nad she would have said “yeah”.
I agree with another freeper who said that about all you can get from this is that she isn’t going to run 3rd-party, and that in the end she’s going to vote for whatever person the republican party nominates.
Let’s keep her from having to support Romney, by finding a conservative we can all get behind to win the nomination (assuming Palin doesn’t run).
It’s already happening now, geez... open your eyes.
Could you please direct me to that quote?
/s
All you know how to do is scream PDS PDS PDS, caw, caw caw. You sound like a trained parrot. A one trick parrot at that.
Idiot? Look in the mirror.
No, that’s according to you, the site owner never specified why ejdrapes was zotted, so unless you and the site owner are one, you only ‘assume’ that was the reason why. And I merely responded to your ‘assumption’.
Okay, show me.
Yes and no.
You're right in that there are, indeed, perfectly good reasons not to support Palin - and they are why she's not my choice. I don't like her support for the LOST treaty. I don't like how she actively kneecapped a real conservative who was primarying McCain. I'm not keen on her sometime softness on illegal immigration.
Yet, your statement that "not even the biggest Palin supporters here will argue that" is not necessarily true. Instead of dealing with legitimate qualms about Palin, there are a TON of people on here who simply dismiss these as being basically on par with the whole "Trig scandal" and who then accuse people who disagree policywise with Palin of having PDS.
For a lot of FReepers, PDS basically means "you're not 110% on the Palin bandwagon."
You are certifiable. Take your meds. Don’t you ever tire of going to Palin threads, acting like a child and crying “victim” when someone won’t take your crap?
What bothers me is there are those in the Palin crowd here who are absolute attack dogs, who froth at the mouth when anyone questions Sarah's conservative credentials. And I hate to say it but it is backfiring on Sarah's behalf.
We have to remember how much money gets spent on media in elections, and ‘12 is going to be way crazier than ‘08.
Let’s say Perry, for whatever reasons, is a shoo-in. That meaning 53.7 of Americans have decided to vote him in, even
this early.
That leaves no silly season and all the spending that goes with it. No way is the LSM going to let that happen.
I don't know, Norm, but it sounds like your dysfunction might be PMS.
Not surprised to see a troll like you perpetuating the lie.
How many people here held their nose and voted for McCain. I’m sure they’d do it again if we got stuck with Romney. We can’t afford 4 more years of Obama.
why, then I can't help you. If you're so concerned as to why ej was banned, why don't you ask Jim?
But it IS a quote from Sarah Palin. Putting it in the headline did make it seem like more than it was, but the words were actual words that Sarah Palin said.
This certainly isn’t the first headline that has been written to be provacative. Hopefully, we are still allowed to be provacative here.
It’s also clear from the posted excerpt that she was in no way endorsing Romney — she was simply saying she would support anybody who won the nomination.
The question clearly was aimed at the idea that some conservatives, including many here, would not support Romney if he was the nominee. The reporter wanted to know if she agreed with that, and it seems she does not.
Of course, she could simply be assuming she’ll get in the race and win, so by saying this she won’t upset voters she will need later. She could just be being a good party person, pledging to support the nominee.
As I’ve said before, let’s make sure that she doesn’t have to make this decision. If she doesn’t run, let’s find a conservative we can all support to win the nomination.
When did opposition to trolling become "a Palin lovefest?"
Why don’t you go look on the Perry threads for starters. Oh, and let’s not forget the early Bachmann threads too. Don’t worry, hon, when the feeding frenzy starts, I’ll be sure to ping you.
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.