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

Skip to comments.

Rush Defends Sarah Palin's Choice to Campaign for McCain
The Economy Colapse ^ | 1/16/2010 | Rush Limbaugh

Posted on 02/18/2010 6:59:52 AM PST by Brices Crossroads

Rush Limbaugh on the Tea Party movement the Republican party and the conservatives Sarah Palin her Daytona beach appearance and McCain. Rush Limbaugh says that Sarah Palin is not a Tea Partier , she is a republican first and foremost, Rush Limbaugh believes that Sarah Palin owes McCain the fact that she is what she is today and that it is a payback time for her to McCain , it is an obligatory payback says Rush Limbaugh.


TOPICS: Breaking News; Constitution/Conservatism; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections; US: Arizona; US: Florida
KEYWORDS: arizona; bloggers; florida; gopwatercarrier; limbaugh; mccain; mccrapola; mccrappalinrino; palin; rushlimbaugh; rushluvsrinos; sarahmexmcdemrat; sarapalin; senoramcpalin; talkradio; teaparty
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-50 ... 251-300301-350351-400401-434 next last
To: pissant

Rather than sounding like some hysterical child, would you post the lie so we can see what it is, rather than you simply screaming liar at the top of your lungs in post after post after post?


351 posted on 02/18/2010 1:21:31 PM PST by ansel12 ( (anti SoCon. Earl Warren's court 1953-1969, libertarian hero, anti social conservative loser.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 350 | View Replies]

Comment #352 Removed by Moderator

To: mkjessup
When a politician allows his enemies to define him/her, he is already sunk.

You're nuts! FWIW, Bush was sunk the first day he took office but yet he survived the 24/7 NON STOP ATTACKS BY THE MSM to be re-elected in 2004. Your comment is classic proof of the influence the media had on even you.

Bush isn't your enemy, never was and is already proving to have been a good, solid president.

FWIW you guys would have probably dumped on Jesus as creating the first welfare state following his feeding of the masses with free bread and fish............

Here's a little test for ya, why is Dick Cheney so reviled by all the moonbat democrats and liberals you have ever had the occasion to discuss him with?

After all, Cheney was nothing more than vice-president, a figure head in our government........

In short, there is nothing a Republican can do to prevent his opposition, with the aid of the equally socialist media, from allowing them to characterize him in any way they want.......

353 posted on 02/18/2010 1:29:37 PM PST by Hot Tabasco (Politics has gotten everyone here too puckered up.........)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 286 | View Replies]

Comment #354 Removed by Moderator

To: mkjessup
Shockingly decent for a malicious, dishonest blasphemer, mk.

You must be trying to obey the FR rules for a change.

Kudos!

355 posted on 02/18/2010 1:47:39 PM PST by ohioWfan (Proud Mom of a Bronze Star recipient!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 352 | View Replies]

To: Man50D
That's why I put "moderate" in quotes, Man. They're not moderates at all.

And I don't have to 'rationalize' anything. Palin endorsed McCain out of loyalty for what he had done to bring her to national attention.

There are no dark secrets, nor is there treachery.

You're making far too much out of this than exists.

356 posted on 02/18/2010 1:50:43 PM PST by ohioWfan (Proud Mom of a Bronze Star recipient!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 343 | View Replies]

Comment #357 Removed by Moderator

To: mkjessup
How about educating this joker?

How about answering my question regarding Cheney?

358 posted on 02/18/2010 2:06:26 PM PST by Hot Tabasco (Politics has gotten everyone here too puckered up.........)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 354 | View Replies]

To: mkjessup
Say Rabs?

Ya calling in you're "bunk buddy" to give ya a hand?..........

359 posted on 02/18/2010 2:08:36 PM PST by Hot Tabasco (Politics has gotten everyone here too puckered up.........)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 354 | View Replies]

To: Hot Tabasco

No, I just enjoy watching a truly educated FReeper like Rabs dismantle ignorant fools like you.

As for that ‘bunk buddy’ deal, looks like classic projection, consider some therapy.


360 posted on 02/18/2010 2:11:09 PM PST by mkjessup (Hi, Sarah Palin here, asking you to put aside your common sense and vote for that RINO John McCain)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 359 | View Replies]

To: mkjessup
There's the nasty name-calling rule breaking mk, back in form again.

I knew you were just faking it when you played nice (sort of), but I thought I'd encourage you anyway.

Oh, well......

361 posted on 02/18/2010 2:11:32 PM PST by ohioWfan (Proud Mom of a Bronze Star recipient!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 357 | View Replies]

To: ohioWfan

You live for it oAf. In fact you THRIVE on it.

Your entire schtick is the continual playing of the victim card, and your antics are talked about (and laughed about) even beyond the borders of FR.

Not that it’s anything you should take pride in, lol


362 posted on 02/18/2010 2:13:52 PM PST by mkjessup (Hi, Sarah Palin here, asking you to put aside your common sense and vote for that RINO John McCain)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 361 | View Replies]

To: mkjessup
LOL! I ain't no victim.

Fool me once shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me.

I got your number the first time you went on the attack, and I won't fall for it again.

In fact, every time I read one of your pathetic, impotent posts, I chuckle.

I have no doubt that you and your fringee buddies talk about me elsewhere. I consider it a badge of honor to be mocked by angry outcasts.

363 posted on 02/18/2010 2:17:45 PM PST by ohioWfan (Proud Mom of a Bronze Star recipient!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 362 | View Replies]

To: ohioWfan

The day has not dawned (nor will it) where you ‘have my number’ on anything.

As for your egotistical belief that I (or anyone else here on FR) waste time discussing you in any way, shape or form, nothing could be further from the truth.

You’re just not worth it.

You do know how to selectively mash that abuse button however.

Now put on the faux indignation and innocence routine and say “who, me? oh *I* didn’t do that!”

Sure.


364 posted on 02/18/2010 2:27:03 PM PST by mkjessup (Hi, Sarah Palin here, asking you to put aside your common sense and vote for that RINO John McCain)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 363 | View Replies]

To: Brices Crossroads
Palin owes nothing to McCain.

She has no business supporting McCain in a primary against a real conservative.

365 posted on 02/18/2010 2:32:55 PM PST by fortheDeclaration ("Our constitution was made only for a moral and religious people".-John Adams)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mkjessup
Ummmm.........you TOLD me I was talked about outside of FR. Can't you even tell the same story from one post to the next?

You see, that's the problem with lying, mk. You have to try to remember what you said last time. Telling the truth is a big advantage.

Now I have come to the conclusion that you and I don't disagree much about politics. It's just that you are a nasty person who likes setting traps, playing games, and being mean.

I've got your number, and you won't beat me again, because your game is so transparent and weak.

And for the record, in case anyone is reading mk's deceitful drivel, the "abuse button" thing is entirely fantasy. He and his buddies just made it up and they won't let it go. It doesn't hurt me one bit because it's so ridiculous, but it sure does make the gang look like fools. Why should I post abuse against mk? He's a joke.

Now, mk. Since you have once again stunk up the room with your presence, I shall depart. There were good conversations before you got here, but you have messed the thread up, as per your custom.

Now go donate to J.D. and start acting like a conservative.

366 posted on 02/18/2010 2:34:25 PM PST by ohioWfan (Proud Mom of a Bronze Star recipient!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 364 | View Replies]

To: aMorePerfectUnion
I agree with Rush’s take on this. She would run again as an “R”. She is returning a favor. If McCain loses, she will endorse JD Hayworth. I suspect JD knows all this too.

Gee, isn't that 'big' of her!

Why doesn't she wait until after the primary and just endorse the winner?

367 posted on 02/18/2010 2:34:39 PM PST by fortheDeclaration ("Our constitution was made only for a moral and religious people".-John Adams)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Brices Crossroads
Palin is doing the right thing in supporting McCain, a bit. She would look like an ingrate if she did not. She doesn't have to be married to this either. A speech or appearance or two and she can be on her way.
368 posted on 02/18/2010 2:40:06 PM PST by Anti-Bubba182
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ohioWfan
Ummmm.........you TOLD me I was talked about outside of FR. Can't you even tell the same story from one post to the next?

In my post #362 (one of the few posts of mine which has NOT been selectively deleted for one reason or another) I said:

Your entire schtick is the continual playing of the victim card, and your antics are talked about (and laughed about) even beyond the borders of FR.

NOTE: I never said that *I* or any one of my fellow FReepers were the ones talking and laughing about you, YOU made that assumption all on your own.

You see, that's the problem with lying, mk. You have to try to remember what you said last time. Telling the truth is a big advantage.

In your case, TWISTING the truth is an even greater advantage but again, it's just another demonstration of your one-trick-pony persona.

Now I have come to the conclusion that you and I don't disagree much about politics. It's just that you are a nasty person who likes setting traps, playing games, and being mean.

Which proves that you know absolutely nothing about me at all. You have created that mental image in your mind so that you can justify whatever you wish to spout off with.

I've got your number, and you won't beat me again, because your game is so transparent and weak.

Thank you for revealing your inner motives and thoughts, you have created this non-existent 'contest' in your mind, you crave some undefined future moment in which you "beat me" for whatever reason you feel the need. I think you need some serious help.

And for the record, in case anyone is reading mk's deceitful drivel, the "abuse button" thing is entirely fantasy. He and his buddies just made it up and they won't let it go. It doesn't hurt me one bit because it's so ridiculous, but it sure does make the gang look like fools. Why should I post abuse against mk? He's a joke.

Playing to the imaginary crowds again. Pompous protesting right to the end. You are innocent as the driven snow (cough-cough-snicker).

Now, mk. Since you have once again stunk up the room with your presence, I shall depart. There were good conversations before you got here, but you have messed the thread up, as per your custom.

Take another look, you have employed your usual victim-scam, engaged in your own name calling while condemning it in others, your oh-so-predictable hypocrisy in action. Physician heal thyself.

Now go donate to J.D. and start acting like a conservative.

Pay attention, I told you I've already donated to J.D. (and will again) in post #352. Oh wait, that's one of the posts that you (har har) did NOT mash the abuse button on.

Of course your insulting posts are allowed to remain.

So much for 'stinking up the thread. Take a look in the mirror.
369 posted on 02/18/2010 2:53:00 PM PST by mkjessup (Hi, Sarah Palin here, asking you to put aside your common sense and vote for that RINO John McCain)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 366 | View Replies]

To: mkjessup
Holy crap.

I have no idea what the argument is here, but you're just so bitter and crazy I can't comprehend why you think this is the right place to have hissyfit after hissyfit.

I sort of remember you claiming to be a Christian in some thread far back. Is this really how you're supposed to carry yourself?

370 posted on 02/18/2010 3:12:50 PM PST by Lakeshark (Thank a member of the US armed forces for their sacrifice)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 369 | View Replies]

To: fortheDeclaration

“Why doesn’t she wait until after the primary and just endorse the winner?”

You are asking a question that requires knowledge of what
is in her mind. I don’t do mind reading.

It may be as simple as a display of class and graciousness.
Rush thinks so. It may be the return of a favor. Rush thinks
so. I have no certain knowledge.

If McCain lost the primary, she wouldn’t have a chance to
graciously return a favor. Who knows?

Maybe she already called JD and talked personally to him -
he indicated he understands.

Actually, I think it is big of her to return favors and
show class and grace. But that’s me...

best,
ampu


371 posted on 02/18/2010 3:21:16 PM PST by aMorePerfectUnion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 367 | View Replies]

To: Lakeshark; ohioWfan
Holy crap.
I have no idea what the argument is here, but you're just so bitter and crazy I can't comprehend why you think this is the right place to have hissyfit after hissyfit.
I sort of remember you claiming to be a Christian in some thread far back. Is this really how you're supposed to carry yourself?


Direct some of that righteous indignation at ohioWfan while you're at it.

And as the saying goes, you really don't have a dog in this fight, now do ya Sparky?
372 posted on 02/18/2010 3:38:51 PM PST by mkjessup (Hi, Sarah Palin here, asking you to put aside your common sense and vote for that RINO John McCain)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 370 | View Replies]

To: mkjessup; ohioWfan
I really don't have a dog in the fight.

Just thought you might want to dial it back a bit, particularly as you both claim to be some kind of Christian.

I've had my spats with ohiofan before, just never got to the intensity level of this. Have at it if you want, it just seems a bit over the top.

373 posted on 02/18/2010 3:47:33 PM PST by Lakeshark (Thank a member of the US armed forces for their sacrifice)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 372 | View Replies]

To: Lakeshark

I don’t know what you feel is so ‘intense’ about the exchange, I’ve been called a ‘malicious, dishonest blasphemer’, and I suppose neither ohioWfan NOR the mods consider that ‘name calling’, another poster who has been around long enough to know better was more than eager to start throwing around homosexual innuendo, that was apparently deemed ‘ok’ by the moderators, in fact the thread clearly demonstrates that any and all insulting posts made by ohioWfan are perfectly ok, any comments that I have made are subject to deletion.

Of course oWf denies emphatically that she would ever hit the ‘abuse’ button, which begs the question “why would someone hit ‘abuse’ on a post of mine responding to ohioWfan, if it were not oWf herself?”

I guess the dog did it. LOL


374 posted on 02/18/2010 3:59:13 PM PST by mkjessup (Hi, Sarah Palin here, asking you to put aside your common sense and vote for that RINO John McCain)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 373 | View Replies]

To: rbmillerjr
Your comment about “nobody put a gun to Palin’s head to support a...socialist” is silly.

It would be silly to claim someone did put a gun to her head. McAmnesty is a socialist. You seem to have that "silly" refrain down pat.

If you don’t get why she supported him, you live in a fantasy world.

Oh I understood a long time ago why she supported him in 2008 and supports him in 2010. It certainly isn't because she disagrees with him on a majority of the issues.
375 posted on 02/18/2010 3:59:49 PM PST by Man50D (Fair Tax, you earn it, you keep it! www.FairTaxNation.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 345 | View Replies]

To: ansel12
Try to get Man50D to name the party that he wants you to vote for, he won’t say their name, but he does know that he doesn’t want anyone voting Republican.

Yes ansel, that is the popular reply among OPers when you lack any cogent content and try to deflect attention from the fact this is the second time Palin is supporting her socialist buddy.
376 posted on 02/18/2010 4:04:39 PM PST by Man50D (Fair Tax, you earn it, you keep it! www.FairTaxNation.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 346 | View Replies]

To: mkjessup; ohioWfan
Whatever. I'm not a mod and don't even know where the abuse button is (just kidding.....I've never hit it......do I sound like Lazmataz?). The story must be interesting.......

Next time can we just do the thread topic, okay?

377 posted on 02/18/2010 4:05:37 PM PST by Lakeshark (Thank a member of the US armed forces for their sacrifice)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 374 | View Replies]

To: ohioWfan
Palin endorsed McCain out of loyalty for what he had done to bring her to national attention.

Party over principle. Thank you for reiterating my point.

You're making far too much out of this than exists.

You're right. So what if Palin is endorsing a socialist sympathizer over a much more Conservative candidate! That's the Republicrat way!
378 posted on 02/18/2010 4:07:02 PM PST by Man50D (Fair Tax, you earn it, you keep it! www.FairTaxNation.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 356 | View Replies]

To: Man50D

“Oh I understood a long time ago why she supported him in 2008 and supports him in 2010. It certainly isn’t because she disagrees with him on a majority of the issues.”

LOL.

You’re a funny guy.


379 posted on 02/18/2010 4:09:41 PM PST by rbmillerjr (I'm praying for Palin....if not I'll support Romney : He sucks but he's better than Obama.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 375 | View Replies]

To: ohioWfan

You have made the most honest post on this thread. This entire thread is composed of one group of people who want Palin to succeed and others who think Palin is standing in the way of their the success of their pet politician.


380 posted on 02/18/2010 4:10:43 PM PST by Sarah-bot (Savage is the only one qualified to become the first female President)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 303 | View Replies]

To: Man50D

Or it could just mean this.

“Try to get Man50D to name the party that he wants you to vote for, he won’t say their name, but he does know that he doesn’t want anyone voting Republican.”


381 posted on 02/18/2010 4:23:13 PM PST by ansel12 ( (anti SoCon. Earl Warren's court 1953-1969, libertarian hero, anti social conservative loser.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 376 | View Replies]

To: taraytarah

there is no “leader” of the TP and thats probably a good thing


382 posted on 02/18/2010 4:42:07 PM PST by kingattax (99 % of liberals give the rest a bad name)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 283 | View Replies]

To: Reagan Man

“Btw, you need to get your facts straight. Richard Schweiker was a Pro-Life Republican, champion of the unborn and one of the first supporters of a Pro-Life amendment to the Constitution.”

How artfully you change the subject from whether the Schweiker pick was a “black mark” (as you put it) against Reagan to whether Schweiker was prolife and therefore desirable as a running mate. The vast majority of the GOP was prolife at the time, and there were more than a few cosponsors for the HLA. (Even BOTH Democrat Nominees for VP four years earlier, Eagleton and Shriver, were prolife!) McCain is prolife. Roe v. Wade was only three years old.
There was no time for Schweiker to have done all the great things you claim he did for the prolife cause BEFORE Reagan sslected him). He represented a Cathoic, heavily prolife state. He was prolife. Big deal.

I have my facts very straight, my friend, becasue I lived through the Schweiker pick, recall the circumastances vividly and it caused real problems for Reagan in the southern delegations. Schweiker, at the time of the pick, was a northeastern liberal especially on economic issues. He was big spender, big government, big union man who was friendly to big government social policies. His selection caused shock waves through the GOP. Jesse Helms, who had saved Reagan from political oblivion in the North Carlina primary a few months earlier, mutinied (so outraged was he by the Schweiker pick) and led a movement to have James Buckley’s name placed in nomination at the 1976 convention to try to deny Reagan the nomination because he thought Reagan had betrayed conservatism. NBC News reporeted from the convention:

(Kansas City) Head of Buckley movement is Reagan delegate North Carolina Senator Jesse Helms who doesn’t like Schweiker Vice President pick. He says now Reagan forces mad at him. [HELMS - says he’s getting hard looks from some of Reagan people. Notes Reagan’s reaction.] Richard Rosenbaum says if Buckley doesn’t stop, he might lose state party’s enthusiasm for Buckley’s Senator reelection. [ROSENBAUM - told Buckley to withdraw.]
REPORTER: John Hart
http://tvnews.vanderbilt.edu/program.pl?ID=489475

Richard Viguerie (who I know is a crank, but had a large following at the time)was so enraged that he abandoned Reagan altogether in favor of Phil Crane in 1980.

My facts are straight. And so is my point. Reagan’s selection of Schweiker (who would be classified as a RINO by today’s standards) was considered a betrayal by conservatives in 1976, even more than Palin’s is, becasue Palin is . Denying it won’t wash. I remember it because I felt betrayed at the time. (BTW, nice try on citing the fact that Schweiker grew more conservative AFTER his association with Reagan. What exactly has that got to do with his selection when he was a dyed in the wool liberal according to the 1976 standards?)Reagan faced an outright revolt over his pick, because it placed someone who had been voting a pretty solid liberal line since he entered Congress in 1960 one heartbeat from the Presidency. And he did it for political expediency, not for any apparent altruistic motive.

Palin’s decision to support McCain will not hurt her, any more than the Schweiker pick hurt Reagan. But a helluva lot of conservative (myself included) felt a kick in the gut when we heard about it. I felt nothing of the sort when I heard Palin had endorsed McCain, both because it is much less of a big deal and because her motives in doing what she did are more selfless and purer than Reagan’s were in picking Schweiker. I say that as a huge fan of Reagan(and Palin). But on this comparison, the Gipper comes off worse than the Governor. and those are the facts whether you like them or not.


383 posted on 02/18/2010 5:00:54 PM PST by Brices Crossroads (Politico and)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 220 | View Replies]

To: Brices Crossroads

Does an endorsement for McCain means she dislikes Hayworth? No.

McCain put her on the big stage. She is repaying McCain. If you read her book, you know she will be very loyal to those who are good to her. MCCAIN was good to her.

McCain’s campaign staff? My guess is she is waiting for the day to tell those losers to drop dead.


384 posted on 02/18/2010 5:19:20 PM PST by Bryan24 (When in doubt, move to the right..........)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Bryan24

“McCain put her on the big stage. She is repaying McCain. If you read her book, you know she will be very loyal to those who are good to her. MCCAIN was good to her.”

Right. the one thing I took away from her book is that hse is a virtuous person who lives by a moral code. That in itself is rare in a politician.


385 posted on 02/18/2010 5:21:38 PM PST by Brices Crossroads (Politico and)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 384 | View Replies]

To: deannadurbin
If she had not been the VP candidate, and subjected herself to the scum in the McCain campaign, she would have been the leading candidate for the 2012 nomination. She’d still have her high poll ratings with Alaska dems et al. She wouldn’t have been subjected to the vicious media attacks, no rahm emanuel/soros/axelrod attacks via ethics investigations. However, they may have already recognized the fierce threat she was going to be to barry and may have subversively started their criminal attacks against her. It’s a testament to the likeability, resilience and strength of Palin that she still has a 40% approval rating.
386 posted on 02/18/2010 6:02:58 PM PST by JApost
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: Brices Crossroads

Please tell my how to ping the Palin list. I admit, I am ignorant.


387 posted on 02/18/2010 6:08:12 PM PST by jonrick46 (We're being water boarded with the sewage of Fascism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Man50D
I'm obviously not goint to convince you, nor you me, and I think we've both made our points.

Thanks for the civil discussion, Man50D.

388 posted on 02/18/2010 6:16:02 PM PST by ohioWfan (Proud Mom of a Bronze Star recipient!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 378 | View Replies]

To: Sarah-bot
Thanks, Sarah-bot.

I want Sarah to succeed in whatever God has chosen her to do. If it's being President, I'm with her. If it's not, I'm there too, because I respect her.

She's an admirable person, and like all Americans, has the right to her own opinions based on her own solid conservative values.

She's the real thing, and real conservatives should appreciate her for that.

389 posted on 02/18/2010 6:20:42 PM PST by ohioWfan (Proud Mom of a Bronze Star recipient!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 380 | View Replies]

To: Lakeshark
Hey there Lakeshark. What do YOU think about Sarah's endorsement? ;)

(The abuse button thing is a total fabrication. Don't let anyone tell you otherwise. I don't believe in wasting the mods time......or mine. :)

390 posted on 02/18/2010 6:25:59 PM PST by ohioWfan (Proud Mom of a Bronze Star recipient!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 377 | View Replies]

To: Brices Crossroads
Looks like I struck raw nerve.

>>>>>How artfully you change the subject ... I have my facts very straight....

Artfully? Me? I didn't raise the issue of Richard Schweiker, YOU DID! I didn't attempt to change the subject either, YOU DID! And on top of that, you got your facts wrong about Schweiker. Period!

>>>>>Reagan’s selection of Schweiker (who would be classified as a RINO by today’s standards) was considered a betrayal by conservatives in 1976, even more than Palin’s is, becasue Palin is.

For what its worth, I didn't see Reagan's choice of Schweiker as a betrayal in 1976. And I don't see Palin's endorsement of McCain as a betrayal either. There are some FReepers today, who consider Reagan a Rino by todays standards and by yesterdays standards too. LOL I don't pay attention to that BS.

The truth is, Schweiker started his political rebirth about the time Reagan chose him to be his running mate. Schweiker's Pro-Life credentials were always rock solid. His last 5 years in the Senate, saw Schweiker evolve from a moderate Republican to a pretty reliable conservative Republican, as evident from his ACU ratings.

Some conservatives weren't always satisfied with Reagan. So be it. That included Jesse Helms and Richard Viguerie. BFD! Today, Viguerie is viewed as a nut job. Which is really what he was back in the 1970`s. Sort of like the nut job Ron Paul. Paul supported Reagan in the 1970`s, but by 1988 called Reagan, a "failure".

>>>>>But on this comparison, the Gipper comes off worse than the Governor. and those are the facts whether you like them or not.

Stop the revisionism! You're so far off base, its pathetic. Reagan's choice of Schweiker didn't hurt him at all. After all, Reagan almost beat a sitting US President for the GOP nomination in 1976. An historic event of the first magnitude.

Like I told you the other day. Palin may be a Reagan conservative, but comparing her to Reagan or criticizing Reagan to make Palin look better, does her a disservice. Let Palin be Palin and let the cards fall where they may. What are you afraid of?

391 posted on 02/18/2010 6:26:55 PM PST by Reagan Man ("In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem; government is the problem.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 383 | View Replies]

To: Sarah-bot

“This entire thread is composed of one group of people who want Palin to succeed and others who think Palin is standing in the way of their the success of their pet politician.”

I don’t know which side is which, but I would say Palin should stick to principals. She got picked as VP by a Progressive who wanted to Fool the base. The base was not fooled. She is great, but McCain isn’t. McCain messed up. Both must now deal with consequences of their choices.

Palin was put between a rock and a hard place and now she must try to not do anything else to crash her chances.

It is a sad turn of events.


392 posted on 02/18/2010 6:32:25 PM PST by Mozilla
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 380 | View Replies]

To: kingattax
there is no “leader” of the TP and thats probably a good thing

Agreed. But there are those who consistently endorse TP candidates, and consistently and boldy support the cause. They are the ones to be admired and respected for remembering that government is to be of The People and by The People and for The People, and NOT of the Party, by the Party, and for the Party.

393 posted on 02/18/2010 6:42:19 PM PST by taraytarah (The Vast Right Wing Conspiracy is becoming Vast-er and more credible every day !!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 382 | View Replies]

To: Mozilla

Well, I’m no fan of Palin, but I’m voting for McCain.

That is a unique demographic.


394 posted on 02/18/2010 6:43:18 PM PST by 200 Motels (I disagree.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 392 | View Replies]

To: Brices Crossroads
My facts are straight. And so is my point. Reagan’s selection of Schweiker...

Good post. Your point is right on target.

395 posted on 02/18/2010 6:49:07 PM PST by FreeReign
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 383 | View Replies]

To: pissant
Well well you are getting better at smashing Sarah but not looking like it...To bad you are on the Titanic...
396 posted on 02/18/2010 6:50:51 PM PST by GregB (God sent Sarah Palin to us!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 294 | View Replies]

To: 200 Motels

Ok...I voted McCain in 2008. Only to stop Obama. I am deeply divided with Palin’s decision. By endorsing him, McCain will probably get more votes in Arizona. I just know that whatever she did was going to create a problem for her. So It would have been better to stay out.

Now the chess pieces are on her side. If she makes the wrong moves, she might offend a whole lot of people pulling for her. I’ve been uneasy since she made the endorsement. I’m not happy about it.

You can be. Fine. But to me, I feel McCain tanked the 2008 election on purpose or if not that never did a thing to win and never used any conservative ideas to fight back.

So America really didn’t want anyone running. And it gave fuel for people to just vote Obama. And that is my feeling.

Only Palin was the only thing going there and she did what she could. Then the progressive tanked the race anyways by suspending his campaign, going to Washington to broker a deal nobody wanted and voting for the bailout.

That 2008 presidential race was the worst race in history. Nothing historical about it.


397 posted on 02/18/2010 6:57:29 PM PST by Mozilla
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 394 | View Replies]

To: mewzilla

bttt


398 posted on 02/18/2010 7:00:56 PM PST by 185JHP ( "The thing thou purposest shall come to pass: And over all thy ways the light shall shine.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: ohioWfan; Gilbo_3; Man50D; mkjessup; stephenjohnbanker
OK.......if you don't know what the word means, let me help you out....

No, allow me!

By your definition of integrity, specifically definitions 1 and 2, Palin fails, contrary to your claim at post 234. One, despite claiming to hold conservative principles, Palin is supporting McCain, a man who holds decidedly NON-conservative principles, if any at all. One can not firmly adhere to a set of principles yet help someone who is actively working against those principles; that is not "firm adherence," i.e., integrity. Two, if, as many Palin supporters like to claim, she is merely acting out of loyalty to McCain, then she is clearly impaired with regards to her commitment to the conservative cause insofar as such commitment is dependent on "firm adherence" to conservative principles. Of course, one could argue that the ends might justify the means, but I won't buy that argument, and neither will the millions of Americans murdered at the hands of illegal aliens so that McCain's "friends" can have cheap lettuce (we can discuss the missing strawberries another time).

As for the third definition, it makes no sense in the given context and as such I see no need to address it.

Any more issues I can clear up for you, aside from your unyielding devotion for RINOs and fair-weather conservatives?

399 posted on 02/18/2010 7:07:18 PM PST by rabscuttle385 (Live Free or Die)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 242 | View Replies]

To: GregB

Boy, I just really ripped her didn’t I? That’s the problem with you huffers. If anyone thinks she’s not the best choice, for any reason whatsoever, the mob shows up to tell us how ignorant we are. Just like the old fredheads. It’s going to be a lively place around here next year.


400 posted on 02/18/2010 7:08:40 PM PST by pissant (THE Conservative party: www.falconparty.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 396 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-50 ... 251-300301-350351-400401-434 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