Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Sarah Palin at CPAC: It is her Party
HumanEvents ^ | Sunday February 12, 2012 | Tony Lee

Posted on 02/12/2012 5:47:13 AM PST by Bigtigermike

And on a day when Palin reportedly generated more enthusiasm than every presidential candidate combined who spoke at CPAC and owned the room and conference, one could not wonder how many who were listening to the speech were coming to the realization that Palin should be the GOP nominee for president much in the same way the majority in attendance at Kemper Arena in Kansas City in 1976 at the Republican National Convention, in their hearts, knew that Ronald Reagan -- and not Gerald Ford -- was the rightful standard-bearer of bold conservatism. 

(Excerpt) Read more at humanevents.com ...


TOPICS: News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: 2012; cpac; palin; sarahpalin
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-62 next last
To: Arlis

So all you genius voice coaches were right she should drop out of the race.


41 posted on 02/12/2012 7:33:21 AM PST by UB355 (Slower traffic keep right)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: llandres

It seems clear to me that Sarah prefers Newt - probably over Santorum by a bit. And yes, it’s because Newt at his best is certainly the opposite of a pale pastel. He can paint the lines between liberalism and conservatism much more crisply and brightly than anyone else in the field.


42 posted on 02/12/2012 7:35:34 AM PST by C. Edmund Wright
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: MuttTheHoople

“Santorum...he showed he preferred temporary political expediency over principle.”

Huh? His support for Specter was the result of a deal cut to get Specter’s vote for conservatives on the SCOTUS — which is what happened. Specter sucked big time, but adding two good Supremes hardly rates “temporary political expediency” for Santorum. It wasn’t for his own personal gain; it was to help America.

Anyhow, all four candidates are terrible — Romney being the absolute worst. Sickening to think what might have been re Sarah. — sigh — (I’m still hanging on to the shirt I made with “SARAH 2012” on the back; you never know.)


43 posted on 02/12/2012 7:36:38 AM PST by MayflowerMadam (Don't blame me; I voted for the American.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Bigtigermike

Palin is on Fox Sunday morning show now. Doing a great job answering questions.


44 posted on 02/12/2012 7:39:03 AM PST by opentalk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndamendmentpa

Yes, a vocal coach would solve her problem, and it’s necessary. I’ve heard so many people from ‘08 to now who are majorly turned off by her and though they think she’s “extreme” and “way out there”, it’s really (I believe) only about her vocal delivery. Thatcher realized this about the female voice, so when she was in a heated situation, she purposely lowered her voice and cadence.

It’s a shame the masses are so shallow, but I’m telling you - they are.


45 posted on 02/12/2012 7:42:05 AM PST by llandres (Forget the "New America" - restore the original one!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Arlis

Maggie was accused of it all the time. It even comes up in the movie! W had a bit of a related problem—that Texas drawl; JFK had the Boston-accent. FDR had another (old Westchester?). But when push comes to shove, it’s what said, not the octave it’s spoken in.


46 posted on 02/12/2012 8:15:20 AM PST by Mach9
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: MuttTheHoople

The first time a President Gingrich tries anything even remotely Conservative, the Washington Post, NY Times, and the major network media will criticize him......then the next he’ll push is something along the lines of repealing Take Home Pay For Private-Sector Workers.


Rofl! This is one of my Gingrich fears, but you said it so hysterically!


47 posted on 02/12/2012 8:30:09 AM PST by Yaelle (Go Santorum!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: MuttTheHoople

The first time a President Gingrich tries anything even remotely Conservative, the Washington Post, NY Times, and the major network media will criticize him......then the next he’ll push is something along the lines of repealing Take Home Pay For Private-Sector Workers.


Rofl! This is one of my Gingrich fears, but you said it so hysterically!


48 posted on 02/12/2012 8:30:15 AM PST by Yaelle (Go Santorum!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: llandres
She has a contract with FNC which I believe precludes her from formally endorsing

Sarah said last night, that her FNC contract does NOT restrict her ability to endorse a political candidate.

She's obviously got other reasons for not overtly endorsing any of the four candidates at this time.

49 posted on 02/12/2012 9:21:04 AM PST by Windflier (To anger a conservative, tell him a lie. To anger a liberal, tell him the truth.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Just mythoughts
Here is some admittedly anecdotal info about the Tea Party. Last year at this time I was dealing with at least one, usually two or three Tea Party talks a week. This year, it's not even one a month. One of the leaders of the St. Louis Tea Party told me his group was down to 25%. Now, we have a lot of ideas why, but the bottom line is that as best I can tell, it lost a tremendous amount of force after 2010. I don't know if everyone thought they had "done their jobs" and could rest, or what. But it has very little of the energy it did over a year ago.

In June, I spoke at an event in Dayton that had 100 people (at most). Just a year earlier, we drew 8,000 (!!!) with no publicity at all. So you can see the change.

I don't pretend to know why Palin doesn't endorse someone, but I have suspicions, and they aren't good.

But going back, I said at the time (and still think I'm right) that Palin's bus tour and movie were methods of testing the water. I'm convinced she had a pollster working with her to see if the support was really there, or not. I'm guessing that it was not. Certainly the movie was a commercial bomb. (I know the distributor, who expected a million copies and stopped after the initial print run).

50 posted on 02/12/2012 9:41:04 AM PST by LS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Servant of the Cross
I think first that Romney will go into any convention either already the winner in delegates or very, very close. If close, he will make sure to have one of the lesser candidates in his pocket with promises, so that would not be pleasant for us.

On the other hand, watch out what you wish for: if it is a TRULY brokered convention, the most likely winner would be Jeb Bush. I don't think any of us want that.

51 posted on 02/12/2012 9:43:17 AM PST by LS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: McGruff

Something just occurred to me. Since none of us would accuse Sarah of being stupid, could it just be that her prediction for a very unusual campaign will come true due to her long range plans?

Consider this possibility:

Sarah knows that if she thew her hat into the ring for the primary carnival (do we REALLY need to start this circus as early as the childish state parties did this year?) the Lamestream morons would have totally sliced and diced her by convention time. So, she sits out the nonsense, goes to the convention with a disorganized slate and no clear winner.

She fires up the grassroots and delegates and gets drafted. 8-))

Stranger things have happened.

Just a thought ........


52 posted on 02/12/2012 9:45:49 AM PST by CanuckYank
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: McGruff

Something just occurred to me. Since none of us would accuse Sarah of being stupid, could it just be that her prediction for a very unusual campaign will come true due to her long range plans?

Consider this possibility:

Sarah knows that if she thew her hat into the ring for the primary carnival (do we REALLY need to start this circus as early as the childish state parties did this year?) the Lamestream morons would have totally sliced and diced her by convention time. So, she sits out the nonsense, goes to the convention with a disorganized slate and no clear winner.

She fires up the grassroots and delegates and gets drafted. 8-))

Stranger things have happened.

Just a thought ........


53 posted on 02/12/2012 9:46:02 AM PST by CanuckYank
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: LS

I was curious about your thinking on the ‘brokered’ convention. I want Newt, but if not him, a convention nomination is better than Willard.


54 posted on 02/12/2012 12:39:40 PM PST by Servant of the Cross (the Truth will set you free)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: LS

Why do you support Bishop Romney over Jeb Bush, or Palin, or anyone else that might emerge in a brokered convention?


55 posted on 02/12/2012 3:10:41 PM PST by ansel12 (Romney is unquestionably the weakest party front-runner in contemporary political history.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: Servant of the Cross

Well, if you think Jeb Bush is better, or Chris Christie, then you’re right. That’s who would emerge from a brokered convention. It won’t be Newt or Santorum or Paul or Palin.


56 posted on 02/12/2012 4:00:59 PM PST by LS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: ansel12

I don’t support Romney over anyone. Reality is, if it’s a brokered convention, he’ll win, but if he doesn’t it will NOT be a conservative. It would be Christie or Jeb Bush.


57 posted on 02/12/2012 4:01:53 PM PST by LS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: LS

So the bottom line is that anybody is better than Romney, anything that derails Mitt is an improvement.


58 posted on 02/12/2012 4:07:14 PM PST by ansel12 (Romney is unquestionably the weakest party front-runner in contemporary political history.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies]

To: Mach9

I think it’s the only thing that would keep her from winning the general election. Can’t believe some of her advisors are not helping here.

Yeah, I’d pick her before anyone else - but she’s not running, and I think knows that even though she’d have the support of all true conservatives, she couldn’t win the general. If not because of her delivery, but because of the media lust to kill a true conservative.....


59 posted on 02/12/2012 5:44:33 PM PST by Arlis (.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: Windflier

Thanks for clarifying - I haven’t gotten to hear her speech yet. Well then, from listening to her on FNSunday, I think she wants to treat all the candidates fairly - as she said more than once, we don’t need to badmouth our own because the BHO machine/media will do plenty of that.

But she has shown favoritism to Newt - even with Chris Wallace when he pressed her to compare him with Santorum, it subtly showed. She had a lot of finesse. And I still say, considering their close marriage and Sarah being such a public figure, that Todd wouldn’t have formally endorsed anyone she didn’t agree with, albeit privately on her part.


60 posted on 02/12/2012 11:16:34 PM PST by llandres (Forget the "New America" - restore the original one!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-62 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson