Posted on 11/27/2010 12:56:43 PM PST by factmart
Okay Pence has always been against Cap and Trade. Palin, starting with her strong comments in July and December 2009 is now against Cap and Trade.
Reminds me of DeMint who defended RomneCare in 2007, and now criticizes it.
LOVE that pic! Thanks.
Not a comprehension problem, but a problem with someone supports a pathway to citizenship via registration for the ~40 million illegal aliens who have invaded the us. McCain supports the same plan with regulation.
He would have to be 35 when sworn in. Joe Biden won his first race for the Senate when he was 29. He turned 30 before being sworn in.
So I guess they are all a passel of phonies.
great
You are taking things out of context. Stop bothering me.
The problem being that Palin didn't write "Going Rogue". Lynn Vincent ghostwrote it for her.
Figger out how to fight the power of incomebentsy, the MSM soviet propaganda, the white guilt, and the gimme mentality, all of those, yes, and you’ll have Sarah POTUS. Udderwise no effing way!
I wonder if any of them will understand this:
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,592942,00.html
VAN SUSTEREN: All right, now, I know that your past as governor of Alaska didn’t — was not the same time that Governor Jan Brewer of Arizona has gotten into office, but I assume that sort of governor to governor...
PALIN: Yes.
VAN SUSTEREN: What’s your thought on the heat that she’s taking over this statute?
PALIN: I’m proud of Jan Brewer for standing up for the constituents in her state, sending a message to Washington, sending a message to President Obama saying, Hey, you need to do your job, sir. And if you’re not going to do it, OK, then we are compelled to do the job for you until you get it right.
President Obama has been suspiciously silent on this issue, hasn’t he? We don’t even know where he stands on immigration reform or securing our borders. He doesn’t talk about it. He gets to punt on that one. And that’s unfortunate because this is a big issue. It’s all about national security. It’s about our sister border states that are inundated with violence and with crime because people illegally crossing the border, engaging in illegal activities for too long now. And some of these border states are saying, Now we’ve had enough. I admire Jan Brewer for taking a stand.
VAN SUSTEREN: Why do you think — I mean, for 20-some years, maybe even longer, even going back to President Reagan — everyone has always said, We’re going to secure the borders.
PALIN: Yes.
VAN SUSTEREN: Nobody has done anything. I mean, or almost nothing.
PALIN: Because they’ve made it political and they haven’t understood that unsecure borders isn’t fair to anybody. It’s not fair to American citizens who ware here legally, paying taxes, following the rules, doing all the things that an American citizen is expected to do. It’s not fair to them. But it’s not fair to the illegal aliens, either, here. They want to come pursue an American dream. Some of them do want to be here to work. But they’re forever going to have to hide because, you know, government’s going to crack down on them when (INAUDIBLE)
So they need to follow that path of legal citizenship, obviously. But these politicians, presidents in the past who have not secured the border, they’ve made it a political issue. They haven’t wanted to tick off a potential base of Hispanic voters, so they haven’t made the tough decisions. And that’s no way to solve the problem. That’s no way to solve any challenge in America, by ducking and hiding and creating division and making these partisan issues out of it.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
VAN SUSTEREN: Well, we have still more with Governor Sarah Palin. Governor Palin is blunt about what she would do about illegal immigration. She’s going to tell you.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
VAN SUSTEREN: Continuing with former governor Sarah Palin on illegal immigration.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
VAN SUSTEREN: Both parties have made promises. I mean, we pull up sound bites where, you know, both sides, you know, Democrat, Republicans, say, you know, Secure the border, secure the border. And then once in office, we certainly don’t see a whole lot of action. Had the election gone another way, or even if you were president, what would you do about immigration?
PALIN: The very first thing is literally secure the border!
VAN SUSTEREN: How?
PALIN: People mock the idea of a fence. What’s wrong with building a fence? Yes, let’s physically secure the border. Let’s ramp up border control. Let’s provide the tools for those who are putting their lives on the line in order to stop illegal immigration of these aliens. Those are a couple of things.
And then you don’t start talking about amnesty, either, kind of as this last-minute, Oh, anybody who’s here in the country right now, we’re going to provide you amnesty, and even though you’ve broken the law and we are a nation of laws, you’ve broken that, we’ll still give you — because then there’s going to be a huge influx of those wanting kind of at the last minute to come over the border because they know that they will forever then receive that amnesty.
So you don’t start talking about that, but the very first thing you do is physically, literally secure those borders. It baffles me and most Americans why for all these years presidents, administrations have spoken about it but never done it.
You’re welcome. Swiped it from onyx. syncro took the photo. :)
Brilliant!
Good post..thank you for sharing that.
If she runs she has my vote.
I don’t know what group you are recommending, but I do support Palin as one of my choices.
I will also support Christie, Daniels, and maybe Jindal. (Yes, I know Christie and Daniels aren’t going to pass the litmus tests of some, but they are good fiscally sound governors.)
Like Marco Rubio but he hasn’t been in the Senate long enough. Don’t like Jindal, I don’t trust him, but he is smart.
I will support with a lack of enthusiasm Romney, but only if he swears to push for the repeal of Obamacare,
If the nominee is Gingrich or Huckabee, I am going to bed and pulling the covers over my head.
Not going to get involved in this long argument. It is only fodder for the left, who picks the insults out and recycles them on their web sites. People should consider this before they start these long, divisive threads.
There are plenty of pros and cons. The U.S. Navy, for instance, has supported ratification of LOST since it was negotiated in the late '70s and further negotiated during the Reagan Administration. Their position is that it codifies very favorable "customary practices" as it relates to access to certain territorial waters to keep sea lanes open.
There are sound reasons to oppose this treaty and, on balance, I'm against it as long as we are willing to protect undersea resources (that the treaty grants to us as "ours") whether we are a signatory or not.
This was Palin's concern as governor of Alaska and she had every reason to be concerned about it with 25% of the undeveloped oil & gas reserves on the planet sitting off the coast in interrnational waters in what would have been the "Exclusive Economic Zone" of the U.S. under the treaty, and with Russia and others chomping at the bit to get at these resources while we do nothing to develop or protect them.
My understanding, and it is a very surface understanding, is that it cedes some sovereignty, if that is the case, I am against it.
John Bolton testified before the Senate in confirmation hearings on April 11, 2005. Here's the relevant portion on LOST sovereignty and taxation. It's Bolton's take:
LUGAR: [D]o you see any potential entanglement of the United States with the Law of the Sea Treaty and loss of sovereignty to the U.N. or to any other world body?That's what he said. He has since turned against the treaty and I think his current reasoning is sound. He has said nothing further that I'm aware of to amend his 2005 position on sovereignty and taxation.BOLTON: No, I don't see that the Law of the Sea Treaty implicates the United Nations in any material respect. And those that have gone over the question of the seabed conclude there's no risk of taxation or anything like that.
The U.N doesn't even administer this treaty but the treaty DOES set up international tribunals to arbitrate seabed disputes. As the only major power not to ratify the treaty, we don't participate. Fine by me, but we must assert our rights to seabed resources that are ours. This was Governor Palin's concern. Presidential candidate Sarah Palin might very well "revise and extend" her position.; Maybe she'll station a couple of carrier battle groups in the Aleutians to protect the resources...LOL.
As I said, I'm opposed to the thing on balance, but the Navy and others disagree. There are plenty of pros and cons but it's extremely easy to demagogue this thing and that's exactly what's going on here.
>> Palin / West ‘12
A hearty ticket indeed. Two of my political favs.
I’m one of the oldies on here and you can count on my support of Sarah for President. I have two grandsons who are very dear to me and I hope and pray that I will live to see this great country returned to what it once was for their sake.
I like your list of Palin, Christie, Daniels and possibly Jindal. There's too much time ahead and things that can happen for me to commit yet.
I also like your suggestion of pulling the covers over your head if it's Newt or Huck. Both of them scare me.
Nice to see you Miss Marple. Hope your Thanksgiving was fun and your family is well!
If you're talking about Bristol Palin, she had a baby, instead of an abortion. We've had 50 million abortions in this country, and I support the choice Bristol made.
LOL!
If I’m undecided does that mean I can only read half the posts?
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.