how Palin seems to say "lame stream media" at 5:12 ? Definitely made me laugh.
Freedom is a byproduct of acceptance - judge not.
Fox News to be included in her term "lame stream media". She still spoke of "they" to Greta, when she would be saying "you" if she meant to include Fox. I think "lame stream media" is a response to how Fox and talk radio's audience used to like to think of those outlets as underdog responses to the "main stream media", but nowadays they have just as good or better ratings as any other media outlet. Saying "lame stream" is meant to refer to the other team.
Glenn Rice didn't lay a lame stream on her. Cast this trollop to the curb.
I really don't get why this was posted on the DP. Sarah Palin is a typical idiotic conservative. Just because she co-opts an occasional libertarian buzz-term doesn't make her the least bit an advocate of liberty. Nothing she said here is anything different than a two faced idiot like Sean Hannity would say. Just a bunch of partisan idiocy. Obama's a "tyrant" for doing exactly the kind of shit I was totally supportive of when the maniacal Bush was in office. Blah blah blah
The message does not matter at all....... right?
Get real, Sarah Palin just trashed the MSM and elitist neo-cons on prime time cable TV. I say that is awesome, whether she is a "typical idiotic conservative" or not.
The individual who refuses to defend his rights when called by his Government, deserves to be a slave, and must be punished as an enemy of his country and friend to her foe. - Andrew Jackson
and also called Snowden a traitor.
Can't be half in and half out. You're either for Liberty or not.
That's sound logic isn't it?
This was a touchdown for liberty scored by Sarah Palin. Sure she's thrown some interceptions and fumbled at inopportune times but she just scored big and I am happy for her.
All of us people are "work in progresses" which is why no man or woman should be worshiped or put on a pedestal. Sarah Palin and many others seem to be moving toward liberty way of thinking. Naturally we are guarded and want to make sure we aren't burned with someone only pretending to be liberty minded...a Neocon in a tri-corner hat so to speak
Here's the deal. Don't worship a person but do applaud their speech when they say the right things. You don't have to trust them fully to celebrate when promote liberty ideas or happen to get it right. When they get it wrong, hold their feet to the fire.
By this type of reward system we are encouraging more people to speak and think as constitutionalists. AND! We end up changing the national conversation. We ALL benefit from freedom issues being widely discussed and defended.
So take the good things Sarah says, and hope it comes again. But make her prove herself day by day.
Well said, my thoughts exactly!
She complained that Obama didn't have much experience and he once said "57 states". Meanwhile the only supreme court decision she knew about was Roe v Wade (when asked by I think Katie Couric back in '08). And how much experience did she have back then? But hey, she could "see Russia" from Alaska.
Let's not forget how much of a joke this woman is.
The so called See Russia from my house comment was never made by Palin, it was an SNL skit.
Palin said, she was the only Governor to get monthly National Security briefings because of Alaska's proximity to Russia.
She is 100% correct.
Palin had went from school board to City Council to Mayor to Oil and natural Resources Commissioner to Governor, nearly 15 years in public service vs Obama who went from Community Organizer to a year and half stint as State Senator to 150 days as US Senator and who never held an actual job. I say she was correct.
The question to Palin was not name a Supreme Court Decision, it was name one you disagreed with besides Roe v Wade.
People forget, Joe Biden asked the same question by Couric and he could only name his own "The Violence Against Woman Act" um however it never went to the Supreme Court, it was Federal Court, he couldn't name another.
But the big thing that people forget, is that it is standard procedure for Candidates to get prep sheets from interviews on what they will be asking. The campaigns get these, Biden received his from the Obama campaign staffers.
Palins handlers from the McCain campaign sabotaged her, did not give her any of the prep material, just threw her out on her first major interview to get blindsided and they did it on purpose. That's why Palin refused any of McCain's handlers after that, and picked her own.
The big thing, is that interview was on the eve of the VP debate, which Palin did very well against Biden and his crazy smile.
If people would quit getting their info from MSNBC or the HuffPo or SNL they would know this.
"The so called See Russia from my house comment was never made by Palin, it was an SNL skit."
I watched her RNC speech to accept VP candidate. She said that during her speech and then SNL ran with it. But it was said by Palin that night and the crowd went crazy over it.
"The so called See Russia from my house comment was never made by Palin, it was an SNL skit."
I was unaware of this so I'll concede this point to you.
"The question to Palin was not name a Supreme Court Decision, it was name one you disagreed with besides Roe v Wade."
That was a case of me being lazy. But it still essentially gets the same point across. She couldn't even come up w/ an answer. Ron Paul wouldn't have delayed even a second.
"People forget, Joe Biden asked the same question by Couric and he could only name his own "The Violence Against Woman Act" um however it never went to the Supreme Court, it was Federal Court, he couldn't name another."
I'm no fan of Joe Biden either.
"Palins handlers from the McCain campaign sabotaged her, did not give her any of the prep material, just threw her out on her first major interview to get blindsided and they did it on purpose. That's why Palin refused any of McCain's handlers after that, and picked her own."
If you're saying she was set up to fail, I certainly wouldn't dismiss it as a possibility. Are you thinking that maybe she was a pawn in something larger?
Sarah Palin is Ron Paul, especially on foreign policy, Supreme Court rulings etc, that comparing apples to the study of the molecular structure of apples :)
Sarah was about state and local government, mostly local and really had no clue about foreign policy.
I can assure you many many here on the DP never knew about the Federal Reserve, how the government manipulates it citizens, etc. before Ron Paul, that doesn't make us bad, we just didn't know. Palin and the Paul's are NOT members of the Council on Foreign Relations, a rarity in national establishment politics. It should be a key indicator of who you should trust?
I think Sarah Palin is a good American, she cares about the country and the country she leaves to her children, she does not flip flop on her core beliefs. When she was thrust in national spotlight, her foreign policy was very limited, but she has grown to come our way, and I think she naturally gravitates our way because of her coming from a regular household, Average American family in a very libertarian and independent State. Is she a Constitutional genius like Ron Paul - NO, but you don't have to be, to be a patriot. Nothing wrong about being cautious, but I can tell you month after month, statement after statement she is learning the truth and she is coming our way. So keep up your guard, drop the old McCain picking her stuff and she might be another ally in this fight.
good posts Joe
“Let it not be said that no one cared, that no one objected once it’s realized that our liberties and wealth are in jeopardy.”
― Ron Paul
Palin was thrown into the fire in 2008. She wasn't ready and didn't have the knowledge. She's learned quite a bit since then. While she is still a work in progress, she's much more of a friend to liberty than an enemy.
I can't trust someone who was a VP to McCain. That is seriously "establishment".
Palin through the campaign she began moving away from McCain policies with about a month to go, then with about 2weeks to go before election day, she really started to bash them in public.
Reagan picked Bush for his VP, Ron Paul backed Reagan, in the end Reagan was a fair president, probably better than what we had for a long long time, by no means perfect. But also not a CFR, Globalist
But Bush on the other hand CFR, Globalist, etc.
McCain was never going to win, the writing was on the wall, Palin was inserted to put the blame on Conservatives for the loss by one Bill Crystal who never met her or talked to her. They take a really good Governor, who was not a national player, conservative and whom gave all kinds of hell to the GOP Alaska Party establishment, same ones we kicked out at the Caucus up there and tried to purposely make her look bad. Why? Because the establishment could get rid of her in Alaska and maybe Nationally forever, and blame a it on a gun loving, pro lifer that gave birth to a Downs Syndrome baby and practiced what she preached and didn't abort, plus the campaign knew her daughter was Prego and Palin dressed like a woman, not a pants suit Hillary man hating type.
So you have to ask, Joe Lieberman was going to be the VP, but he seen the writing on the wall and said no way to the train to nowhere and old Crystal of course didn't want to blame the loss on the establishment. As Palin said, she was shocked when they asked her.
If it was me and even if I knew McCain was a NeoCon, but of course I would accept because that gives you a foot into the door.
Palin was probably one of the first, if not the first to back Rand Paul, she has always had good things to say about Ron Paul supporters and told her supporters to back our efforts to stop the corruption at the national convention and then told them to support our people running for the GOP chair in Alaska.
Palin has come along way, even tossed out McCains foreign policy advisors in 2009 and inserted a more non-interventionist foreign policy advisor for SarahPac. The establishment GOP hate her more than Ron Paul, and that is why you should know she is no neocon and no party hack.
But, once again, you've made some interesting points. So you're thinking that the R establishment wanted to simultaneously bring her down and also to pin McCain's loss on her. I do know she's said good things about Ron Paul at least once but so did almost all the candidates in the 2012 primary.
Even if I accept all of your points though, how come Palin didn't endorse Ron Paul in 2012?
My bad I have auto correct on, I guess Billy Crystal is more populat than Bill Kristol in my auto, lol
I think Palin wanted a brokered convention, she helped out candidates by State, after Iowa she kinda pushed Paul, then Newt, then Frothy etc. But she never pushed or endorsed Romney. I hit some Palin forums and that was the tactic of her supporters. She even said when asked if she was drafted at a brokered convention, "I wouldn't say no, anything can happen at a brokered convention" and she said, "I want this nomination process to go to the end" and when Frothy and Newt dropped out and they asked her to endorse Romney, she said NO because "there are still other very good candidates running (Meaning Ron Paul) and states that have yet to participate"
Give Palin credit for wanting to learn. She admitted she learned a lot mostly from Ron Paul and spoke very highly of him many times. She had a large base of sheeple grazing on her words and almost woke more than a few of them up, Then, before deciding whether or not to throw her hat into the ring in 2012, Palin went to Israel to talk to Bibi and decided not to run after that meeting. Red warning flag right there.
Deciding not to run for the presidency in 2012, instead of endorsing Ron Paul, the man who taught her so much and of whom she often spoke in glowing terms, she turns around and endorses his opponent, Gingrich. Huge red flag on that one!
If, for whatever reason, Palin felt she could not publically endorse Dr. Paul, why didn't she just not endorse anyone? I dunno, maybe it's a cultural thing but, where I come from, her endorsement of anyone except Ron Paul would be considered immoral. Better to just clam up, if you have a reason not to do the right thing.
So, while I agree with what joeinmo wrote, the bottom line is indeed "how come Palin didn't endorse Ron Paul in 2012?" My thought is it's because she can't be trusted.
“It is the food which you furnish to your mind that determines the whole character of your life.”
the comment to your question above your post
See above, as I said she had pushed towards Ron right after Iowa, but I truly think she wanted a brokered convention and that was the goal.
Gave me food for thought. I'll admit I could be wrong but, those red flags are troublesome for me. I still see her as neocon lite. Maybe in time, she will be able to convince me otherwise. Thank you for your intelligent comments and thoughts. Much appreciated.
It's not like she picked McCain....she was asked to serve as the VP for the country...and she accepted.
As far as McCain...he fooled a lot of people. My dad called the other night and said he was sick to his stomach that he ever voted for him in 08.
But many of you do not want her. Perhaps you want the Liberty Movement to remain a few hundred thousand libertarians.
We're just listening to her criticize the Obama administration, which is the equivalent of shooting fish in a barrel. If she was in power, she'd be voting for the same types of anti-liberty garbage, just wrapped up in Republican rhetoric. I would be stunned if she would stop any of the programs that she speaks out against. Remember that Obama spoke out against Gitmo, spying, the wars, etc when he ran in 2008. The establishment politicians are just plain opportunist liars.
So, in short, if she can turn the American people against the current administration, that's fine. But I don't want her as any kind of a spokesperson for the liberty movement. Switching between corrupt R's and corrupt D's every 4-8 years doesn't advance liberty in the slightest. It just pushes the country further toward outright tyranny.
If a media whore like Palin is willing to talk in public like this about the problems with the economy and scandals, there is something huge coming. She also talk about the nwo and people pulling the strings since 2008.
Lock and load.
She ran as VP to John McCain, a complete and total NWO puppet.
As such, she is NOT to be trusted. And I mean EVER.
Want DP delivered to your inbox daily? Subscribe here: