Palin: Tea Partiers "Have to Pick a Party"

[..PAUL4PRES..]

I wonder who she wants the tea party to pick. LOLLLOLOLOl

Palin: Tea Partiers "Have to Pick a Party"
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/02/17/politics/main6215033.shtml

[Fr3shjive]

F you Palin. We'll vote for who ever we want regardless of the letter next to their name.

[FrankRep]

Sarah Palin is viewed as an anti-establishment politician, particularly as a result of her ties with the Tea Party movement, but her past ties with McCain and the mainline Republican Party suggests she may still be in the establishment's tent. by Art Thompson


Sarah Palin and the Establishment (http://www.jbs.org/jbs-news-feed/5954-sarah-palin-and-the-establishment)


Art Thompson, CEO | John Birch Society (http://www.jbs.org/)
10 February 201


Sarah Palin is an engaging personality. I do not normally listen to people in politics but in her case I made the exception.

In the case of Palin, since she is relatively new on the national political scene and was addressing a portion of the Tea Party movement, I decided to watch her speech.

Sarah Palin said a number of things with which any conservative could heartily agree ― but these were for the most part glittering generalities without specifics.

Downsizing government was mentioned without examples of how or what to downsize. She talked about getting government to live within its means but there was no talk about eliminating the bureaucracy needed to lower taxes, such as the Department of Energy, Education or Homeland Security.

Homeland Security you ask? Should we really get rid of that agency? Yes, for if the American people really understood what was happening due to the war on terror, this would be a bigger issue than healthcare.

And here is where Palin entered unconstitutional waters, constantly invoking support for our troops as the excuse.

Support for our troops is a must. But support for our men has to come within constitutional parameters. Support for our troops also means only sending them into harm’s way by a declaration of war.

That’s not what has happened in the war on terror. Instead, we have invaded countries under United Nations resolutions and NATO edicts. NATO is a regional arrangement under the UN and the treaty states so right up front. In adhering to these international arrangements, we have no adhered to our own Constitution.

The terrorist network is run out of Moscow, which is something The John Birch Society has proven over and over, but certain conservative circles refuse to recognize this. Instead they follow a neo-conservative leadership which is essentially internationalist in outlook. They advocate all sorts of conservative positions but always promote more foreign entanglements. [1 (http://www.thenewamerican.com/index.php/usnews/foreign-policy/1508), 2 (http://www.thenewamerican.com/index.php/usnews/crime/1872-kgbfsb-the-game-remains-the-same), 3 (http://bit.ly/4yg4xS)]

The terrorist network is armed and trained by Russian KGB/FSB agents. Yet our government calls Russia a partner in the war on terror. As a result we will never win this war anymore than we have won the war on drugs, which has dragged out now longer than any combat war we have ever engaged in.

Our government’s policy is tantamount to the State of Pennsylvania invading New Jersey because Newark street gangs are harassing Philadelphia. Even though the Newark gangs are essentially supplied with drugs, guns, and direction from the New York mafia bosses, the Pennsylvania governor and National Guard leaders keep this information from their citizens and soldiers.

It is all rather like attacking the tentacles of an octopus rather than the body. And it is what we are doing in the war on terror.

And, Sarah Palin, knowingly or not, is supporting this policy. It is internationalist rather than constitutionalist.

In light of the fact that we appear to be preparing to go to war with yet another country, Iran, the war on terror is becoming a prolonged problem. Iran is a surrogate state of Russia, armed and supplied with nuclear capability from Russia and China. Its government is Islamic-Leninism. If we invade Iran while shaking hands with Putin, what will the next country be, and the next?

The real question is whether or not Sarah Palin really represents grassroots conservative America or if she is a creature of the “establishment.” On this point, certain questions present themselves. For one, why would a Council on Foreign Relations-run McCain campaign pick Palin to begin with? Surely they understood that she would become a conservative icon regardless of the outcome of the 2009 election. And Alaska does not exactly have many electoral votes to have helped win the election. And why would Palin, if she is anti-establishment, run on McCain's establishment ticket?

Now, how can Palin support McCain and the Tea Party movement at the same time? They are not just miles apart; they are diametrically opposed, at least at the grassroots of the organization.

Palin is obviously a mainstream Republican. She has become surrounded by people who are very astute. We hope she will not be a pawn for the Establishment to help control their own opposition.


SOURCE:
http://www.jbs.org/jbs-news-feed/5954-sarah-palin-and-the-establishment

[low preference guy]

Yes, they should pick the "Tea Party".

Tea Party Candidate To Challenge Harry Reid For Nevada Senate Seat (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/02/14/tea-party-candidate-to-ch_n_461878.html)

[Immortal Technique]

i have been doing a massive amount of face palming over the last couple days

[Flash]

Pick the Democratic Party. It would be easier considering the Dems will be in shambles at the end of 2010 anyways.

[LittleLightShining]

Well at least Palin and the C4L are on the same page.

[catdd]

The agenda is perfectly clear.

[DapperDan]

i have been doing a massive amount of face palming over the last couple days

Me too.

http://mypetjawa.mu.nu/archives/picard-facepalm.jpg
http://www.fallen-legion.eu/news/data/upimages/DoubleFacePalm.jpg


I've pulled one of these lately as well....

http://theneweditor.com/uploads/ImpliedFacepalm.jpg

[aravoth]

"Now the smart thing will be for independents who are such a part of this Tea Party movement to, I guess, kind of start picking a party," Palin said. "Which party reflects how that smaller, smarter government steps to be taken? Which party will best fit you? And then because the Tea Party movement is not a party, and we have a two-party system, they’re going to have to pick a party and run one or the other: ‘R’ or ‘D’."

http://i31.photobucket.com/albums/c370/aravoth/sisko.gif

[TC95]

Well, if you weren't convinced that Sarah is trying to hijack the Tea Party for the Republican Party then you should be now. She's just trying to bring the sheep back into the fold. I can't stand the woman.

If the Tea Party joins the Republican Party then they won't be the Tea Party any more. They'll be the Republican Party. Good one, Sarah. You're brilliant!

[catdd]

Plus she wants to bring in all the libertarians, constitutionalists, and democrats that have become involved on a nonpartisan basis.
She's a ringer, and her neocon handlers are using her as bait.