Sarah Palin Should Start a 'Freedom Party' (within the GOP?)

The Hill ^ | 07/01/13 12:13 PM ET | By Bernie Quigley

[SoConPubbie]

I just don't know how this ends well. I don't trust "conservatives" at all, after Rubio and Ryan are showing that they don't really care about stopping the invasion. And Sara Palin? I want to believe, but she has yet to renounce her support of McCain.

First of all, as the Bible states, you judge a tree by it's fruit.

By that definition, neither Rubio or Ryan are "conservative".

They may have been conservatives at one time, judging by their actions, but no matter what they call themselves, or anyone else for that matter, they are not conservatives.

So that talking point of yours is moot.

Secondly, this Amnesty issue is the issue that defines McCain, and Governor Palin has come out squarely against it.

Short of calling McCain names, I'm not sure what you are looking for in terms of renouncing.

Finally, you bring up Rand Paul who has is own Amnesty Proposal of granting 2 million Illegal Aliens Amnesty each and every year based on the "certification" of a Pro-Amnesty Congress that the border is secure.

Once again, you judge a tree by it's fruit.

[Gator113]

GO SARAH!

[FreeAtlanta]

Might as well. The communist did the same type thing inside the Democrat party and took that beast over. It would be great to oust the pansy prancing rinos in our party. Just kick these bums out if they don’t support and vote at least 90% of the time with the platform.

lay down some basics; secure double fence border before anything on immigration, an unborn baby is an individual and has constitutional rights, fiscal spending (force zero line budgeting and have departments justify every damn dime of spending two times a year), reduce government by at least 25%, require bills that have yes vote to be read on the floor one at the time by those voting yes, require bills to be less than a half page, cut congressional pay in half, have congress WFH (work from home via teleconference), set the number of days a president can travel and can vacation (enough of this perpetual vacay BS), etc. etc.

[ansel12]

The Founders knew it and that's the way they wrote the Constitution without outlawing prostitution, sodomy, gambling, etc. They figured the people of the States would govern themselves. The Founders were libertarian enough in principle to leave those very kinds of things OUT of the Constitution.

See post 86.

[grania]

I don't support ANY OF THEM. The primary issue to me is the invasion of the US. Solving our other problems starts with stabilizing and assimilating the citizens we already have. A few of the pols do seem excellent on the issue, but unless they can get border security and stop legalization of the invaders, they're not to be believed.

Why? In the HOR the "conservatives" let Boehner keep his position. They keep funding Obamacare. So no, it isn't going to work with the social issues argument. Justice Roberts put an end to that.

[grania]

I don’t like Rand Paul on amnesty either, though his rhetoric has improved. It’s just that I’m not in a mood to vote for ‘pubs if the invasion of the US isn’t stopped. So, I’ll go with the new kids on the block for fresh thinking, the ones who really don’t care about what McCain and Lindsey etc think of them.