Skip to comments.Daughter: Sarah Palin "Definitely Knows" If She Is Running Or Not
Posted on 06/28/2011 7:03:53 AM PDT by HojczykEdited on 06/28/2011 7:05:41 AM PDT by Admin Moderator. [history]
Bristol Palin tells "FOX & Friends" that her mother, former Gov. Sarah Palin, has made up her mind and "definitely" knows if she is going to run for President or not.
BRIAN KILMEADE, FOX & FRIENDS: "Do you get the sense that your mom has not made up her mind yet or do you think she knows and hasn't told told?"
(Excerpt) Read more at realclearpolitics.com ...
Why keep the adoring Fan Club and the news media guessing?
Because that is where the money is:
After praising Palin, Coulter goes on to say that she does not think that Palin will run for president. Hannity counters by saying that Coulter is "unnecessarily narrowing the field" and that Palin has publicly said she is still considering a run. It is at this point that Coulter reveals, "I think she's saying that because she also said Newt Gingrich told her you can get higher speaking fees if you pretend you are running for President."
There is your answer:
" .... you can get higher speaking fees if you pretend you are running for President."
Pretending to run for the Presidency "enhances your brand":
Trump's mission in life is to "Enhance the Trump Brand". That is a fact and running for President therefore makes all the sense in the world. ...... 5 posted on Wednesday, April 13, 2011 6:32:08 PM by Polybius
That translates into notoriety which translates into big, fat Reality TV show contracts.
In this thread's article, Bristol says, "You know, she definitely knows. We've talked about it before. Some things just need to stay in the family."
"Some things just need to stay in the family"?
Bristol tells the entire World, (including her son that will read it in the future when he is 15 years old) about pre-marital sex on drunken, coed camping trips with the father of her son (who is very publicly trashed in the same book) but .....
"Some things just need to stay in the family"?
Why write a Waaaay Too Much Information book that will humiliate her son in the future?
If some things "just need to stay in the family", shouldn't that be right at the top of the list?
The "tell-all" book was written because there was money to be made.
"No. No. Bristol was trying to teach!"
Teach what? That drunken, teen-aged, coed camping trips lead to .... (you'll never guess this one) .... sex? And that unprotected, teenaged sex leads to .... (you'll never guess this one either) .... pregnancy?
Why would a political decision be more sacred than the most intimate details of the personal lives of Tripp Johnston's parents?
Because saying that Sarah Palin's adoring fans are being strung along in order to maximize profits will hurt the money-making potential of the Palin family. That definitely needs to "stay in the family".
Sarah Palin knows perfectly well that a serious Presidential campaign can leave you in a financial hole.
Sarah Palin has found her niche as a very successful and very highly paid celebrity entertainer. She likes that niche .... a lot.
If Sarah Palin runs, she will stick her toe in the water just enough to enhance her registered trademark Sarah Palin brand just like Donald Trump did to further his often stated efforts to continuously "enhance the Trump brand".
Once the financial purpose has been served, Sarah Palin will bail out to, once again, concentrate on $100,000 speaking fees and Reality TV show deals for herself and for Bristol.
Actually governing in the "stuffy old political office" that has the highest heat of any political kitchen?
Forget about it. That's not where the easy money is.
The easy money is in Reality TV shows and on $100,000 speeches. (Bristol charges between $15,000 and $30,000 per speech.)
Sarah Palin and Bristol Palin have carved out an extremely lucrative niche in the entertainment industry. They, like other Reality TV celebrities, will pull political publicity stunts to "enhace their brand" but, from now on, the Palin family business is not fishing and it is not politics. From now on, the Palin family business will be firmly based on lucrative speaking fees, books and Reality TV shows.
Politics will be used, as Trump used politics, only to "enhance the Sarah Palim Brand".
I predict that Sarah Palin will ultimately endorse Texas Governor Rick Perry for President.
MAY 31, 2011 .... Palin plugs Perry: "I really like him" .... Unprompted, Sarah Palin brought up Rick Perry's name yesterday as a strong presidential candidate. "I think he would be a fine candidate.... we have a lot in common. I really like him.
Sarah Palin can then keep on making her millions of dollars as an entertainer and can claim that she was a "King Maker". A serious candidate with ten and a half years of experience as the Governor of the second most populous State in the Union can then actually DEFEAT Obama in 2012.
And no, at least on the Planet Earth (the mileage on Planet Sarah Adoration obviously varies), a candidate that 65% of all voters in a recent Gallup poll have stated that they will "definitely NOT" vote for cannot defeat Obama in 2012 no matter how cute the Fan Club thinks she is.
Sarah Palin, by not mounting a serious run but coyly hinting at one sees a Win-Win situation for Sarah Palin and America: She will continue to earn millions of dollars in the entertainment field, her Brand will be enhanced and Obama will be defeated in 2012.
Sarah Palin's adoring Fan Club, by wanting her as the GOP nominee, are irrationally working for a Lose-Lose situation for Sarah Palin and America: She will end up millions of dollars in debt (like Hillary), her Brand will be trashed and Obama will be reelected by at least a 65% to 35% landslide in 2012.
Sarh Palin has no intention getting herself and America into that Lose-Lose situation. In this regard, Sarah Palin is light-years ahead of her Fan Club. Although her Fan Club may live in Planet Sarah Adoration, Sarah, herself, has her feet planted firmly on the Planet Earth where she will maximize her Brand and maximize her income rather than bankrupting herself chasing the impossible. Sarah, herself, has no illusion that she can be elected President and is playing her cards accordingly and extremely well.
"That's why I am supporting Governor Rick Perry for re-election. He does what is right regardless of whether it is popular. He walks the walk of a true conservative. And he sticks to his guns and you know how I feel about guns!" ...... Sarah Palin, January 17, 2009
Wow. That's an...interesting post.
I guess I'll simply say that more votes than those from her dedicated "Sarah supporters" will be necessary to get her elected. And telling people that you're smarter and more perceptive than everyone else isn't exactly the way to marshall support for her. Quite the opposite, in fact.
Based on what? Certainly not her record as an ineffective mayor of a town of fewer than 6,000 residents or her half term as governor of a state with fewer than 700,000 residents.
"he is described as a "tall, swarthy man" who resembles an ancient Egyptian pharaoh. In this story he wanders the earth, seemingly gathering legions of followers, the narrator of the story among them, through his demonstrations of strange and seemingly magical instruments. These followers lose awareness of the world around them, and through the narrator's increasingly unreliable accounts the reader gets an impression of the world's collapse. The story ends with the narrator as part of an army of servants for Nyarlathotep."
Who is your candidate? Obama (you probably won't admit that, even if it's true)? Romney (is that any different from Obama in substance)?
Based on Palin's record, Sarah was an excellent mayor and an excellent governor. That seems not to matter to many, since she now stands in the way of a socialist utopia that would already have arrived if it weren't for all the "unexpected" bad economic news that has slowed the progress toward Obama's version of communism. Those who love America (a category that doesn't seem to include those who trash Palin without bothering to collect any facts) are not worried about the size of Alaska or about Palin's appropriate and clearly explained departure from the Governor's mansion. We're interested in Sarah's exceptional character and qualifications and their potential to facilitate Obama's departure from our White House - an event that must be scheduled for January 20, 2013.
Actually, Obama reminds me mostly of “Wile E. Coyote, Super Genius” from the classic Warner Brothers cartoons.
He certainly keeps falling off of cliffs and getting nailed by falling Acme anvils while cooking up elaborate schemes to catch the Roadrunner . . .
Except to this point, he’s gotten away with it. Unfortunately.
Since you are so big on facts - Alaska: 2010 census: 710,231
Apparently everybody elses record was so bad that McCain had to pick her to be Vice President.
Truth is truth. You can put a verse label on it or you can put it in Paul’s mouth or King Nebuchadnezzars mouth and its still true. Its just true that if God sets his favor on someone, it does make that person undefeatable. Do you deny, for example, that if God wants to set Israel free from Egypt, that the Pharaoh has any chance at all of stopping him? Or do you think King Nebuchadnezzar is wrong to say that God does whatever he wants in heaven and earth, and no one can stop him or even challenge what he is doing?
Paul is saying in Romans 8:31 what Hebrew Christians already knew from these and many other stories of God setting his favor on nations and individuals and overcoming their enemies for them against seemingly impossible odds. He is just applying that general truth to the specific instance of individual salvation. The Sovereignty of God is taught in one form or another on every page of Scripture.
And it occurs in our lives too, in so many different ways. The most important of these is that God will not fail to bring his sheep home to Heaven, no matter what obstacles they may face in this life, whether material or spiritual. That is the message of Paul in Romans 8:31.
But God also rules over the affairs of humankind. He raises up kings and takes them down. He sets his favor on a young sheepherder named David, and though David must quit his home and hide from King Saul in the caves like a common criminal for years, God does not forget David, but in due time puts him on the throne, just as he promised.
If God is for David, who can be against him?
If God is against Saul, who can help him?
If you believe the above two propositions are true, regardless of who said them, why would you have a problem applying that truth to someone living now? God is the same yesterday, today, and forever, right?
Yeah. He’s Wile E. Coyote, half-way down from the edge of the cliff to the desert floor, holding a sign saying “So far, so good.”
It’s just too bad the rest of us are strapped to his back. It’s not the fall that gets you, it’s that sudden stop.
(You gotta keep a sense of humor, yah?)
He can’t make the announcement.
He’s going to be the Running Mate.
See Post 201.
Running or not running is totally irrelevant.
What is relevant is if you are running with a firm conviction that you are going to win the general Presidential Election on November 2012 or if you are running for other reasons (increasing your notoriety and income potential) that have absolutely nothing to do with the belief that you have a snowball's chance in Hell of actually being elected President of the United States of America.
Case in point:
I put Sarah Palin's intention of pretending to run, for as long as she can possibly get away with it, at 100%.
I put Sarah Palin's chances of actually declaring as a Presidential candidate at 50-50.
I put Sarah Palin's intention of actually fighting it out in the primaries, to the bitter end, as Hillary did, at ZERO.
Once the Sarah Palin brand has been enhanced, Sarah Palin will bail out (with an excuse that will sound extremely noble to her adoring Fan Club) before the campaign starts making a significant dent in her own bank account.
The length of her run, if any, will therefore totally depend on how many donations she collects. As soon as the campaign serves no useful financial purpose to increase the current net worth or the future potential net worth of the Palin family, the Sarah Palin Presidential campaign will come to a screeching halt.
Regardless of what the media says, Sarah Palin is not stupid. She may not be the most well read politician in the stable regarding topics she has no interest in (History, geopolitics, etc.) but she is an extremely smart cookie and her current bank account reflects that.
Will Sarah Palin go millions of dollars into debt when she can read the Gallup polls that say that 65% of all voters will "definitely NOT" vote for her?
Of course not.
While I openly question the rationality of Sarah Palin's rabid supporters, I do not believe that Sarah Palin is dumb and such a course of action would be as dumb as a doorknob stupid as you can possibly get.
Sarah Palin is as dumb as a fox and she is playing her cards brilliantly.
As I said, I believe that, eventually, Palin will endorse Governor Rick Perry, who, so far, is the most conservative candidate that has expressed any interest in running that can actually beat Obama.
A cute female without any executive experience who has been in Congress since 2007 (Bachmann) will not be elected President of the United States of America. That is nothing but Affirmative Action and America, given that choice, will stick with the Affirmative Action figure that now has 4 years experience. Bachmann is just another Chritine O'Donell that will lead the GOP to an electoral booldbath in November.
A pizza chain CEO with a Politically Correct skin color who has never won a single election in his life (Cain) will not be elected President of the United States of America. That is nothing but Affirmative Action and America, given that choice, will stick with the Affirmative Action figure that now has 4 years experience. Cain is just another Alan Keyes that will lead the GOP to an electoral booldbath in November.
So, Palin is saying that she "really likes" Perry: Ten and a half years as the Governor of the second most populous State in the Union and of the State with the highest job increase in the Union by far.
Translation: "I have a Texas-sized load of successful executive experience and I happen to be conservative, according to Sarah Palin."
That is the type of conservative that can actually win in November of 2012 which is why Sarah Palin is throwing praises his way.
In the end, Sarah Palin will enhance her brand, increase her earning potential, increase her net worth and actually help get Obama defeated in 2012 rather than pulling another Christine O'Donell fiasco.
In terms of population or area, I'm indifferent to the population disparity between NY or WY and Alaska and to the size disparity between TX or RI and Alaska. Governing a state is governing a state. I've run my own business with 3 employees, with 10, with 300, and with just about every number in between, as well as consulting for those with many thousands of employees, and what surprises me is how little difference size makes once you get past ten or so employees. [Note: I currently have no employees and act as an independent consultant.] Alaska is a state, which makes it big enough that running it successfully, as Sarah did, qualifies as executive experience. Read what they said about her four years ago, or three years back, or any time before McCain named her and she became a potential threat to socialism and not just to inefficiency and corrupt republicans:
The wipeout in the 2006 election left Republicans in such a state of dejection that they've overlooked the one shining victory in which a Republican star was born. The triumph came in Alaska where Sarah Palin, a politician of eye-popping integrity, was elected governor. She is now the most popular governor in America, with an approval rating in the 90s, and probably the most popular public official in any state.
Her rise is a great (and rare) story of how adherence to principle--especially to transparency and accountability in government--can produce political success. And by the way, Palin is a conservative who only last month vetoed 13 percent of the state's proposed budget for capital projects. The cuts, the Anchorage Daily News said, "may be the biggest single-year line-item veto total in state history."
As recently as last year, Palin (pronounced pale-in) was a political outcast. She resigned in January 2004 as head of the Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Commission after complaining to the office of Governor Frank Murkowski and to state Attorney General Gregg Renkes about ethical violations by another commissioner, Randy Ruedrich, who was also Republican state chairman.
State law barred Palin from speaking out publicly about ethical violations and corruption. But she was vindicated later in 2004 when Ruedrich, who'd been reconfirmed as state chairman, agreed to pay a $12,000 fine for breaking state ethics laws. She became a hero in the eyes of the public and the press, and the bane of Republican leaders . . .
She has the experience, the fundamental values, the backbone to live by her beliefs, and the charisma to win. She has been vetted more thoroughly than anyone in history, finding nothing more harmful than an occasional unflipping believable word choice or the coining of a new word that she refused to refudiate. Sarah is not just pro-gun in front of the NRA, but pro-Second Amendment at all times and in front of her own children. She is not just pro-life in front of those who love unborn children but even when facing the terrible dilemmas that the far left sees as automatic reasons to "choose" death for a child. She is not just pro-military for photo ops but pro-military when raising a son who deployed to Iraq. I could go on, but we know from her 24,000 pages of newly released and maniacally dissected correspondence, from every action in her life, and from our life experience of dealing with the real deal face-to-face that Sarah Palin is what she represents herself to be. What more could anyone ask?
What a steaming pile of bunk!
Because everyone wants a piece of The Palin’s. People like to use good people’s names for their own good - just like the name Ronald Reagan because she is in the same class as him.
The WORLD knows SARAH and any thread on her/family - the rats and commies coming running with their list in hand! How pathetic to watch them so obsessed over someone they don’t like/want. They just need their ‘daily venting of hate’ towards a PATRIOT - lest they choke on so much vile.
This horse has been beat to death! You respond by reading her book, wherein she explains it. Botton line - she was putting her State ahead of herself in that decision. ..... JaguarXKE
That's right, Puppage.
Sometimes, you have to do the right thing. Sometimes, you have to put your duty to your State ahead of yourself.
And sometimes .....
If that allows you to start hauling in the BIG BUCKS with $100,000 per pop speeches and with Reality TV shows ......
Well, what I can say?
Sometimes you just have to suck it up and make the sacrifice.
Now, getting back to seriousness:
Did Bill Clinton quit?
No, he stuck it out and his legal issues paled in comparison to Palin's
So, what lesson did Sarah Palin teach the filers of nuisance lawsuits?
"If you want to get rid of a Governor of Alaska that you do not like, BLACKMAIL WORKS!"
Why do the Somali pirates now avoid U.S. ships and Russian ships?
Because the U.S. and Russia have shown the pirates that they do not give in to blackmail.
Why are all other ships fair game for the Somali pirates?
Because other nations surrender to blackmail. .... Like Sarah Palin surrendered to blackmail.
Those who believe that Sarah Palin can do no wrong will make excuses that it was noble for Sarah Palin to surrender to blackmail instead of drawing a line in the sand and stating: "The Governor of Alaska does NOT run away when faced with blackmail. Not now. Not EVER!"
Sarah Palin took the easy way out because is was more painful to fight and because she wanted to cash in on the millions of dollars that were out there for her taking before her fame grew dim while governing instead of starring in Reality TV shows and grabbing headlines with $100,000 per pop speeches.
In the end, the lure of millions of dollars of personal wealth was a lot more attractive to Sarah Palin than the admitedly hard sacrifice of standing and fighting off every single last blackmailer.
It is a lot easier and vastly more profitable to make millions of dollars starring in silly Reality TV shows, camping with tabloid queen Kate Gosselin, than to stand up against the blackmailers of the Office of the Governor of the State of Alaska.
Life Tip Number 788: "Excuses are like belly buttons. Everybody has one."
Bristol was crucified in the media - and how manipulative of you to say her son will read her book - and ignore the 2.5 years of trashing her he will read, also. And how his father was used like a lib pawn and how he spoke out against his own grandmother. Good job Bristol of getting the truth out. And, you, Polybius fail in your attempt.
So all trashing to say your candidate is Perry. If your post is indicative of his voting base - he’s scratched out from a list he’s not on yet. So thanks! Did you or your loved one get your required shot yet from big gov’t Perry, yet? BTW, Perry got Sarah’s support because he asked for it like she did with any candidate who asked.
So you’re against capitalism. Ok, that’s fine.
Scripture is placed in a specific context for a reason. I am not interested in discussing your attempts to change the subject, I am interested in discussing the gross distortion of Romans 8:31, which was not written to muse on the possibility of Sarah Palin’s presidential campaign.
Paul had a reason to include the verse where he did. Our task is not to clip the verse from its context and try to use it elsewhere, our task is to study the verse *in* context and glean *in context* applications from it.
That would not make sense even if it appeared in a bad Kung Fu script.
"As they say,deception begets deception"
Your whole complaint seems to be that I made comments about you rather than to you. The comments themselves would occupy the same public space regardless.
You seem to be confusing deception with disrespect.
Only the latter can be earned.
“Her defenders like to say that she quit because of...”
The “because of...” part varies, as you’ve pointed out. But it’s not the important part.
She quit. It is a negative to most conservatives. No question. Nobody is perfect.
But knowing when your usefulness has expired and/or voluntarily quitting when you can no longer handle the job would not be such a bad trait in a politician.
Of course, it would be fairer to voters to warn them you might just up and quit half way through a term.
If she’d say “if I do as bad as Obama has done in MY first two years, I’ll quit”, I’d guess that she’d get MORE votes not less.
“Posts like yours at #36 embarrass Sarah Palin, Christians and conservatives alike.”
I’m a fan of all three. And I agree completely.
Then please explain where I’ve been “deceptive”.
I can wait.
Not when you are the national abstinence spokeswoman in America, you have to write your book, your story, for the young audience that you are delivering your abstinence and pro-life message to.
“your every pore oozes hatred...”
No, no, no. That’s just my new after-shave. It’s from Cloven Klein.
“Good. Enjoy it.”
Oh well, many of Wisdom’s triumph’s over ignorance are wins by default.
Where’s my knife? Time to carve another hash mark on the keyboard of Freedom.
I saw Bristol on FOX this morning. She did not look like the Bristol on DWTS.
I can’t decide if I like the plastic surgery or not.
Tis true. However, with this one (pnsn), the fail, while blatantly obvious to all, is vocally and vehemently denied. It reminds me of the Black Knight, a Python classic.
Cute, more blah, blah, blah from the servant. LOL! You found a someone to talk/listen - birds of a feather. LOL!
Good grief, it was in her announcement of her resignation as Governor.
That expression: retreating, or going to reload?
Why keep up on the PDS when no one listens anymore?
And nary a one, including Mrs Palin, comparable to Jefferson or Reagan.
The bar needs to be raised. Yet I'm afraid it won't be until the American voter learns the hard way.
I still don’t understand Paul Bunyan.
Sorry. Disagree. Consider the following:
Proverbs 16:33 The lot is cast into the lap; but the whole disposing thereof is of the LORD.
Your version of the Context Rule says, hes only talking about lots being cast into laps, so dice are not controlled by God, because they are not lots, and they are generally cast on the ground, not into laps.
My version of the Context Rule says, hes talking about a game of chance; the principle is that even what we consider random is really still under Gods control.
My Context Rule still produces a rock solid conservative, evangelical understanding of Scripture, and is consistent with some 2000 years of sound Biblical hermeneutics.
Your rule, where I am not allowed to see general principles because the general principles might somehow be inconsistent with the specific instance, is frankly something Ive never heard before anywhere. I am a graduate of a well-known Bible school, and of a well-known conservative Christian university, have read extensively in the subject matter for many years, can read some Greek and some Hebrew, believe in a grammatical historical approach to interpreting Scripture, believe in a literal creation, a literal Adam and Eve, a literal Devil, a literal universal flood, all the miracles of both testaments, the literal virgin birth of Jesus, the literal death and bodily resurrection of Jesus from the dead, by which we have the forgiveness of sins and the hope of life everlasting, the literal visible return of Jesus at the end of days, the eternal punishment of the wicked, and for the redeemed the glories of the eternal state with the triune God, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, forever.
And yet, in all that, I have never heard once, in any material I have read, no matter how conservative or liberal, nor have I found it anywhere in Scripture, that I am not permitted to think, when I read the Biblical text, of the general principles that emerge from the specific details of the narrative before me.
So I am sorry, but unless you can actually convince me, from Scripture, why I should not be permitted to perceive general truths as well as specific truths in holy writ, I will obstinately continue to think as I read, because that is what thinking is, the continuous transformation of an incoming stream of raw data into a meaningful hierarchy of truth. You are literally asking me to leave off the top layer of that hierarchy of thought, and solely because it displeases you that one such general truth in a particular passage might well reasonably apply to Sarah Palin.
Not gonna happen.
BTW, I noticed you didnt even attempt to answer any of my earlier questions. Let me try again. Do you believe the following propositions are true:
If God be for David, who can be against him?
If God be against Saul, who can help him?
If you do not believe they are true, do you believe they are false?
If you believe they are true, then why would they not be as true for you or me or Sarah as they were for David and Saul?
Last question: Why are you not answering my questions?
Cue the crickets
“reminds me of the Black Knight”
I love that scene.
Ya know, there WAS one appendage of his that did not get cut off. So it IS possible that he procreated.
You never saw his face.
You never see PNSN’s name.
Or... was King Arthur actually Carl Rove’s great, great, really great grandfather and he and Sir Rollins and the rest of “the establishment” have been fighting against the Knights of the Non-Candidate since the middle ages?
iow...you can’t. No surprise, no surprise at all.
Are you kidding?
Palin's()utter ineptitude as an executive blew a land deal for the ice-rink to nowhere. That didn't stop her from building roads and services out to the property though. By the time the town cleaned up after her it cost them over $2 million more than the original deal would have.
Excellent? Barely mediocre is more like it.
Join the crowd. I don't understand any of it.
Romans 8:31 is not a proverb, thus it is not interpreted as one interprets a proverb.
I have already told you that my interest lies in the misuse of Romans 8:31 as seen in this thread. I am not interested in your attempts to divert that subject. Your refusal to stick to that topic suggests that you are unable to defend your thesis that the verse was not taken grossly out of context.
Romans 8:31 was not written to indicate God’s support for any politician or leader.