Posted on 12/30/2010 6:31:05 PM PST by Jeff Head
On Sean Hannity's special program on Thursday, December 30th, 2010, he had Sarah Palin on as the guest. He asked her if she was considering running for the Presidency in 2012, and she said she was. That she is making it matter of serious prayer and consideration. that her husband, Todd, would support her, and that she felt the children would. She said if the country needed her, she would offer herself up to public service and we would wait to see who else entered the race. I read it as she was going to be running and that the primaries will sort out who the ultimate candidate would be.
All I can ay to this, if I am correct, is, thank God.
I believe Sarah Palin has the potential of leading a turn around in this nation as big, if not bigger than what Reagan accomplished after Jimmy Carter when he was elected in 1982.
Why? Because the American people are already demanding such a turn around. The Tea party Movement in America exerted that influence in the 2010 elections. I believe in 2012 i will be even stronger and that Sarah would win, and win gig, and that she would have a supportinve majority in both the House and Senate.
I pray to God it is so.
As to her campaign in 2012 for the Presidency of the United States against Barrack Obama, should she win the primaries, I believe the following two pictures sum it up best why she will route the marxist and send them packing out of our nation's capital in 2012.
She, her family, their faith, their values, and their story (particularly of choosing life for their young son and then so obviously being blessed with love for that son and he for them) represent the absolute refutation of all the tired old liberal mantras and victimology and a culture of death that they malignantly use to mentally, psychologically, and financially enslave whole classes of people.
From women's rights, to family values, to gun rights, to abortion, to energy policy, to taxation, to envrionmentalism, to fundamental governing principal, to U.S. soveriegnty and independence, and on and on...Sarah Palin is a wrecking ball to the leftist, liberal, socialist house of cards.
We can start with defunding Planned Parenthood. As far as I know, this funding went on under George W. Bush and a Republican Congress I would be happy to find out I’m wrong about this one, by the way.Yes, I keep getting e-mails in that regard; to work toward stopping the funding of PP. And you're right about Bush regarding the funding (at least that's what I've been told). He was a good president, but not a great president, and the nation is now, more than ever, in need of a great president IMO. I like Sarah Palin a great deal; that's why this all bothers me so much. I'd like to see Jindal and Palin team up, but I realize that would take a lot of rosaries.
Again, you’re wrong. She believes that the states should be allowed to allow abortion if they want to. That’s a far cry from what you’re saying.
This is not only destructive of our free republic’s most important foundational principles, it is in opposition to her own party’s Reagan pro-life platform - which recognizes the child’s personhood and resultant protection by the clear provisions of the Fourteenth Amendment.
Absolutely true. She has her flaws, different than other candidates, but they're still there. Gosh, that must mean she's human......
She is still head and shoulders over any candidate I see right now:
*She's a person that wears her conservative convictions up front with passion.
*She fights back against the evil of the radical left rather than cowering under fire.
*Her conservatism is fully after the mold of Reagan, she believes in his three legged stool of a strong economy, a strong military, and strong moral conviction.
*She has a personal magnetism that is necessary to win.
*She is brightly telegenic, which is important in this day and age in order to win.
*She connects with people as individuals as well as in her speeches, a very unusual trait.
*She has learned to handle herself in interviews since the Couric debacle.
*She has gone over the heads of the media with her creative understanding in using social networking and other new forms of media.
*She has solid leadership skills rather than just an intellectual understanding.
*She has the best political instincts since Reagan.
*She has a full range in knowing what's important to America right now.
*She has a connection with the average American that is uncanny.
*She can see and communicate the emptiness of Obama's agenda, and the full promise that a revitalized conservatism can do for America.
*She's filled a gap in the conservative movement, becoming one of its top spokesmen as well as the top target of the enemies in the media and the democrat party.
*After being savaged by our wonderful media, she has picked herself up with class and grace, becoming successful in spite of them.
All this since she went on her book tour a little over a year ago.
That's a decent start on what makes her so likable to much of America, and I'm sure we could triple the list I just made.
Do it!
>> I think this is a repeat program and actually ran earlier in the year. Can anyone confirm this?
Confirmed.
There are already TWO specific constitutional amendments that protect the life of every innocent person in their explicit, unmistakable provisions. And one of them makes it clear that the states have an imperative duty to protect every innocent life and provide for the equal protection of the laws for every single person.
By the way, you completely avoided my question. Totally non-responsive.
Do you share Governor Palin’s support for the Law of the Sea Treaty?
It’s not how I feel. It’s how the document was written. As I understand it, most criminal law, including murder, was meant to be the jurisdiction of state governments. The Federal government could prosecute treason, piracy, and a few other things.
Furthermore, you know how I feel, because I expressed my support for a Human Life Amendment in my reply.
Nothing is guaranteed in campaigns. Just ask President Hillary Clinton about that. I think Sarah should run because she has charisma and is the only genuine outsider in the Republican ranks.
I just hope she sticks to a consistent, solid conservative platform. She did a little too much bashing of Wall Street “greed” during the 2008 campaign and she also loves the disastrous liberal Title IX quota program for crowd-free women athletes.
But otherwise she has taken conservative positions and I think she could really make a statement in the 2012 campaign — just as she did with the Tea Party in 2010. The nation needs her voice.
The Federal Constitution was written to restrict the Federal and, via the 14th Amendment, the state governments. The founders did not give the Federal government the power to prosecute most crimes, including abortion.
Wrong. Go peddle your crap somewhere else.
And how was slavery ultimately outlawed coast-to-coast? BY AMENDMENT!!!
Just determine when the egg drops down the chute and avoid intercourse at that time. Saves money on the birth control.
Actually, if Roe is overturned on the basis of an inherent right to life, it takes the states rights argument out of the picture. That is why I tolerate those who use the states rights argument. Most of the time, I believe they use it because they hope it'll stop an endless volley of questions. Nothing moves forward unless R v W is overturned. That is the first battle.
With all due respect, Catholicism is not the only valid form of Christianity. and praying to mother mary is out right paganism.
But our Constitution already explicitly protects the life of every innocent person.
I interpret the 5th and 14th Amendments to prohibit the Federal and State governments from taking innocent life, or funding that activity. Unfortunately, the states still have to do the heavy lifting to outlaw abortion (a crime committed by private individuals), because the Feds do not have that specific power. They’re merely prohibited from taking that life themselves, or funding such activities.
No State shall...deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
Even Blackmun, in the written Roe vs. Wade majority opinion, openly admitted that "if the fetus is a person," they are "of course" protected by the Fourteenth Amendment.
So, he and his colleagues dehumanized the child.
But we have pro-choice for states Republicans running around admitting that the fetus is a person, as it clearly is by any modern scientific measure, and yet are still saying that the states can allow them to be killed if they want.
I say the latter position is worse than Blackmun's.
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.