SarahPAC raises $733,000 in first six months of 2009; Update: Rush wonders about third-party run
posted at 3:30 pm on July 13, 2009 by Allahpundit
Actually, that’s only a five-month total since the PAC wasn’t up and running until the end of January. By comparison, Romney’s PAC raised $1.4 million through the end of May, but then fundraising is pretty much Mitt’s full-time gig these days and he already has a polished team around him left over from the primaries. Let’s see what happens in the second half when he and Palin go toe-to-toe.
The most intriguing detail from Politico’s report:
The majority of the money raised by SarahPAC so far has come in the form of “unitemized contributions,” meaning donations of less than $200 each. PACS are not required to name those small donors in their filings with the FEC. The remaining money came through more than 700 different $200-plus contributions made by donors from all around the United States.
According to its FEC records, SarahPAC’s biggest expenditure during the reporting period was the more than $103,000 it spent on EDonation.com, a Virginia-based firm that specializes in online fundraising.
Not surprisingly, it sounds like she’s going to follow The One’s lead and turn her support among the base into a cash machine via small donations. In fact, one of the co-founders of Team Sarah has an op-ed in the Examiner today urging her to do exactly that. The only problem: Obama didn’t raise most of his money that way. In fact, percentage-wise, he raised less from contributions under $200 than Bush and Kerry did in 2004. What made him a fundraising juggernaut capable of taking down the Clinton machine was the small money he raised combined with his ability to peel off big donors and big party names from Billary. If Palin runs a true outsider campaign in 2012 and tries to win on the strength of the base alone, she risks being overwhelmed by Romney vacuuming up the big money from party chieftains. Which is to say, even an outsider needs “insiders.” Help her, Fred Malek, you’re her only hope!
Exit question: I’m told Glenn Beck was yelling about a third-party on the radio this morning, a subject that’s been on my mind lately. So choose, bearing in mind that a split conservative vote greatly benefits The One. See, e.g., Clinton’s two victories.
Update: He knows third parties are sure losers but the thought of a “true conservative” faction clearly has him intrigued.
When I watched her speech, when she announced that she was leaving the governorship of Alaska, I didn’t hear the word Republican mentioned once. If I’m Sarah Palin and I’m conservative — Republican Party’s been just as mean-spirited to her as the Democrats have. A lot of them have, a lot of Republican media, a lot of the so-called conservative media have been. I don’t know if she’s going to campaign for conservative Democrats but if she believes that conservatism is the way to go. The one thing that does slightly worry me about this is this whole third party business. Yeah, it’s remote but it’s still a possibility out there and there are a lot of people pushing a third party and that’s — Third parties, they lose, they just lose. Third parties never end up with a congressional or Senate candidates. It’s just not the way to go. We’ll save that for later if that actually begins to transpire, we see it beginning to transpire.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: « Previous 1 … 4 5 6 7 8 … 10 Next »
She scares the shiite out of you, which means you must be about the size of a marble at this point.
Bishop on July 13, 2009 at 5:59 PM
This is the first time I have ever seen someone admit they made a mistake and retract a statement…good for you!
CCRWM on July 13, 2009 at 5:59 PM
Yeah, I know, but I just loved picturing the Dem strategists trying to figure out what they could/could not say against a party of a strong woman and an outspoken conservative black man. Some loooooong nights for the PC crowd. And Keyes wasn’t afraid of being outrageous. I kind of like outrageous, like, you know…Samuel Adams
guntotinglibertarian on July 13, 2009 at 6:01 PM
How about the “Get the F**k Out of My Life Party”?
guntotinglibertarian on July 13, 2009 at 6:03 PM
Gov. Palin has my money and my vote no matter which party nominates her (or not).
Zorro on July 13, 2009 at 6:03 PM
Go back and look.
upinak on July 13, 2009 at 6:03 PM
So far I’ve seen a woman who has “fundamental” beliefs and core values that she is unwilling to compromise. That is what I believe drives the MSM and pundits nuts. Just heard that Hillary has now given tax breaks to foreign property holders in New York that will cost the state millions in revenue. As noted, she was against this when she ran for the Senate. Just an example of how they stand for nothing and will say and do whatever they see necessary to keep a job. At least when Sarah says something, I for one believe she will remain true to those beliefs. Win or lose I hope she doesn’t fall prey to the political norms. That way she will always be a winner to all who stand with her.
hillbilly on July 13, 2009 at 6:04 PM
Screw you…repeat the question.
guntotinglibertarian on July 13, 2009 at 6:04 PM
Let me say upinak, I like your style. No nonsense.
massrighty on July 13, 2009 at 6:05 PM
You’re right. She didn’t compromise. She capitulated.
guntotinglibertarian on July 13, 2009 at 6:08 PM
From the results of the above poll, it might be important for the power brokers in the GOP to inform Romney that he doesn’t have the support of the base, and for the good of the party, he should not split the vote by running.
Doubtless this is what they will do…/sarc off
Instead the GOP will let the tail wag the dog, ostracize Palin, and lose to the Marxist. To top it off, they’ll blame it on Palin eventhough SHE has the majority of the base. If we painted all the sidewalks in DC silver, they’d still not see themselves as the politics as usual problem.
Carolina Kat on July 13, 2009 at 6:10 PM
doesn’t seem too much a stretch that a conservative “third party”, with talk radio (rush, beck) promoting it, could bleed the GOP out. And just like that, we could have two parties again.
Maybe it is time the people took back a major party, and it will only start by supporting a third party…
Ed Graef on July 13, 2009 at 6:14 PM
“Where anyone that actually listens to her interviews (bewsides Gibson and Katie), her speeches, even her tweets (you think she just pulls those quotes out of thin air? it takes a WELL READ PERSOn to use quotes of famous people off the top of her head) Can see that far from being stupid Palin is if anything very smart.”
Yeah Camile Paglia roundly shot the “Palin is stupid assertion”. If Palin wanted to make a grab for the PUMA vote she could do worse than Paglia stumping for her. Which she would do. Also NoQuaterUSA reports that there has been something of a coup de’ etat over at the National Organization of Women last month. Mainly due to perceived silence re; mysoginy/bias of the MSM towards both Hillary & Palin.
FYI while NQUSA is a left of center site, They abhor Obama and have droves of oppo-research against him in their archives. Its not a bad resource and should be made use of.
Archimedes on July 13, 2009 at 6:15 PM
Sarah owns the right-side political chatter. Awesome…
beatcanvas on July 13, 2009 at 6:15 PM
TY. I had assumed [because I also had assumed that she would be - automatically - immune from any lawsuits regarding matters within the scope of her office] that the lawsuits against her involved conduct other than that which was related to her office.
I guess that a double-assumption is really bad.
:O(
OhEssYouCowboys on July 13, 2009 at 6:16 PM
There’s a difference between stupid and ignorant.
If Palin has ever read Hayek, Rand, Friedman, Kirk, Burke, Paine or Buckley, I’ll eat my hat.
guntotinglibertarian on July 13, 2009 at 6:18 PM
P.S. And my thanks to upinak and Dr.Cwac.Cwac., for their assistance.
OhEssYouCowboys on July 13, 2009 at 6:18 PM
I’m waiting, upinak
guntotinglibertarian on July 13, 2009 at 6:19 PM
Much less the Federalist Papers.
guntotinglibertarian on July 13, 2009 at 6:19 PM
you forgot to add Reinhold Niebuhr
runner on July 13, 2009 at 6:21 PM
Yeah, sorry. And Saul Alinsky.
guntotinglibertarian on July 13, 2009 at 6:22 PM
Rerun the poll with an option for “Palin as the GOP nominee.”
Sapwolf on July 13, 2009 at 6:22 PM
I know a lot of well-read, eggheads – who didn’t know enough to come out of the rain. In fact, lots of them were Professors.
And we know what their political leanings are.
OhEssYouCowboys on July 13, 2009 at 6:23 PM
If Palin has ever read Hayek, Rand, Friedman, Kirk, Burke, Paine or Buckley, I’ll eat my hat.
Much less the Federalist Papers.
guntotinglibertarian on July 13, 2009 at 6:19 PM
Have read all the works of those listed. Ive read many you cite, but certainly not all. Nor do I beleive it would be entirely necessary to be a true conservative!
Archimedes on July 13, 2009 at 6:24 PM
guntotinglibertarian on July 13, 2009 at 6:18PM
Be prepared to get to get sick and have to have your stomach pumped.
technopeasant on July 13, 2009 at 6:24 PM
In fact, since Paine was mentioned … I’ll take Common Sense over being well-read, anyday, if it’s an either-or proposition.
OhEssYouCowboys on July 13, 2009 at 6:25 PM
Damn! I meant have you read all those listed. Typing, cooking and talking to someone else at same time does’nt work!
Archimedes on July 13, 2009 at 6:26 PM
Actually, consider this:
The GOP doesn’t know what the hell they are or what they’re doing. At this point, it’s being run by a jackass affirmative action pick who doesn’t even defend the party against comparrissons to the Nazis. (Are we POSITIVE this guy isn’t a plant?)
Oh, that and the party heads apparently have chosen a strategy appears to be: “Uh, people think liberals are cool. Let’s be more like THEM!” Leaving party conservatives (Read: The BASE) out in the cold. Really great strategy there to take advantage of a Democratic Party that’s exposed itself for what it really is…and finding out quickly that nothing short of martial law and canceled elections will keep them in power past Jan. 3 2011.
Speaking of the Dems, the proverbial “final veil” has dropped on the Dems and the American Democratic Socialist Party has been exposed. How well CAN that play for Blue Dogs seeking re-election? What about Blue Dog voters? How well is this going to play to their youth base when they realize socialism sucks (Got news for the Donks: The kids are starting to notice!)?
Perhaps, this is a perfect storm: Obama sucks. The GOP is going to end up running a wet sponge in 2012.
The key to the third party is that they can’t simply run a POTUS candidate; they need to mount an assault on the congress and start grabbing seats there. Best strategy would be to peel off Blue Dogs as Dem numbers continue to tank and GOP conservatives tired of the Beltway Mafia and Northeast Cartel running the party into the ground and get them to defect in the 2010 mid terms. It can’t be a solitary figure, it’s got to be a full blown party; a movement. A third party POTUS would just get handcuffed by the two parties and wouldn’t be able to get anything done. Thus, a strong support base in the congress itself must be forged first; to lay the goundwork for the third party POTUS candidate to actually become a viable candidate in the eyes of the public.
Clock’s ticking folks. Stay with one of the two aging Spend, Spend, Spend (and worse) Cartels, currently posing as political parties or work to build something new that’ll take this country back from them and start moving it in the right direction.
SuperCool on July 13, 2009 at 6:27 PM
No, if you can’t have the freaking testicular fortitude to go back and check for the question… WTF are you complaining about.
Talk about someone who can’t keep up! Jesus, what a toad.
upinak on July 13, 2009 at 6:27 PM
If Palin has ever read Hayek, Rand, Friedman, Kirk, Burke, Paine or Buckley, I’ll eat my hat.
Much less the Federalist Papers.
guntotinglibertarian on July 13, 2009 at 6:19 PM
Now, now kiddies! There’s no reason to start acting like a bunch of Lib-tards. Whaty we all know is that victory is needed in 2012!
Archimedes on July 13, 2009 at 6:29 PM
You’re still doing it, apparently. :)
Snowed In on July 13, 2009 at 6:29 PM
Three hats. And a feather pillow.
guntotinglibertarian on July 13, 2009 at 6:30 PM
You’re too insignificant for me to scroll up. You challenged me…now repeat the question or STFU.
I mean that respectfully, of course.
guntotinglibertarian on July 13, 2009 at 6:31 PM
Paine iswell-read.
guntotinglibertarian on July 13, 2009 at 6:32 PM
First OFF dipstick. I asked YOU a question and it is OBVIOUS that you can not KEEP UP with the discussion like other who have obviously been around here a tad longer then your ignorant self.
Second.. if you can’t GO BACK and look for my NAME, which isn’t very common then you need to STFU and maybe understand that I don’t LIEK to repeat myself to a arrogant little waif such as youthat honestly has no testicular ANYTHING!
I don’t HAVE to repeat myself as I have proven myself on this blog.
So how about YOU STFU and LEARN little boy!
upinak on July 13, 2009 at 6:33 PM
guntotinglibertarian on July 13, 2009 at 6:35 PM
Grade Obama at Politico.com.. Surprised at the amount of F grades, in the past, they were more pro-Obama.
http://www.politico.com/
reshas1 on July 13, 2009 at 6:37 PM
Can’t take the fact that it is in another segment. I.E. ione page back! Get a grip child.. I am not going to ask you something again that you obviously have avoided. You haven’t answered any of my questions actually.
LMFAO maybe someone has ADD! Poor little adult!
upinak on July 13, 2009 at 6:38 PM
She has read Rules for Radicals, and The Thumpin’. She has studied her enemies plans well, and knows their plans.
“Obama,you magnificent bastard! I read your books! “-Sarah Palin
portlandon on July 13, 2009 at 6:39 PM
I was playing on his name and his pamphlet. I was saying that I’d rather have someone with common sense in office, as opposed to being well-read – assuming that it was an either-or proposition.
OhEssYouCowboys on July 13, 2009 at 6:39 PM
Hey, thanks for notching it back on the CAPS. Now…what was the question again?
guntotinglibertarian on July 13, 2009 at 6:40 PM
Notice everyone… you are answering a fool.
I call troll.. everything Sarah does it WRONG in this rejects eyes.
Move on!
upinak on July 13, 2009 at 6:42 PM
But it’s not an either-or-proposition. Ronald Reagan was enormously well-read and it was that, together with his common sense, that made him a great man. Otherwise, he would have been just a folksy actor.
guntotinglibertarian on July 13, 2009 at 6:42 PM
Is it harder than knowing how to use the quote feature on HotAir? You lose.
portlandon on July 13, 2009 at 6:42 PM
So, what was the question, again?
guntotinglibertarian on July 13, 2009 at 6:43 PM
If you are leaning towards Romney, you are NOT a libertarian. Get a name change.
Sapwolf on July 13, 2009 at 6:43 PM
So you’re the ultimate arbiter? Who knew?
guntotinglibertarian on July 13, 2009 at 6:43 PM
There are only TWO libertarians out there:
Ron Paul and Sarah.
I’ll take Sarah over Paul.
Sapwolf on July 13, 2009 at 6:44 PM
sorry if already asked….anyone know when we will know how much $$ is in Palin’s online defense fund?
Ris4victory on July 13, 2009 at 6:44 PM
I like Sarah too, but we’ve seen this movie before, starring Ross Perot.
It doesn’t end well.
Hawkins1701 on July 13, 2009 at 6:45 PM
What on Earth makes you think I lean towards Romney? Someone an hour ago or so asked me who I would propose, other than Palin…Romney was not among my choices.
guntotinglibertarian on July 13, 2009 at 6:45 PM
Sorry, but Palin is not a Libertarian. She raised taxes on oil companies, favored (albeit briefly) the bridge to nowhere…not a Libertarian.
guntotinglibertarian on July 13, 2009 at 6:46 PM
Enlighten us with the person so blessed to receive your vote & support oh wise trailblazer of wisdom & truth….
portlandon on July 13, 2009 at 6:47 PM
Sarah! Sarah! Sarah! Run Sarah Run!
Dr Evil on July 13, 2009 at 6:47 PM
I hope Sarah starts a …Second Party!
Firebird on July 13, 2009 at 6:47 PM
It’s official.
You’re a Romney troll.
:)
Sapwolf on July 13, 2009 at 6:48 PM
Port.. he believes that taxes were raised on the oil companies LMFAO.. need I go further. he is going off the MSM meme.
upinak on July 13, 2009 at 6:48 PM
I just made my first political donation – ever – at her SarahPAC site, and will keep donating as long as she stands against Washington’s Big Gov’t and its Gov’t Media.
Karmi on July 13, 2009 at 6:49 PM
Well, upinak would tell you to scroll the freaking back up, but since you must know:
Michele Bachman
Rudy Giuliani
Mike Pence
Jim DeMinth
Lynn Cheney
Rick Perry (maybe)
guntotinglibertarian on July 13, 2009 at 6:49 PM
I wonder if he supports the legalization of Pot or other drugs.
wanna bet?
upinak on July 13, 2009 at 6:49 PM
OK then. That by default leaves Ron Paul. YOU are a Paulist if you don’t like Sarah and are a libertarian.
Correction then if you insist:
You are a Paulist troll.
Sapwolf on July 13, 2009 at 6:50 PM
I bet Sarah wasn’t stupid enough to be in a Movie where a man portraiting a gay fashionista confronts him with his pants down around his ankles (in a hotel room no less. Poor Ron Paul…..
portlandon on July 13, 2009 at 6:50 PM
Sept. 6 (Bloomberg) — Alaska Governor Sarah Palin, who has joined the Republican national ticket as a tax-cutter, was a driving force in raising a tax on oil companies last year that will help swell the state’s budget surplus.
The increase backed by the Republican vice presidential nominee will, at current prices, raise oil revenue to $11 billion this year — almost twice what the state needs to fund its government — state documents show. Alaska also has gotten more money from the federal government than its
residents pay in taxes — $1.75 per tax dollar in 2006, the most recent year available, according to the Tax Foundation, a Washington research group.
Suck wind, upinak
guntotinglibertarian on July 13, 2009 at 6:52 PM
What’s your point, clever boy?
guntotinglibertarian on July 13, 2009 at 6:52 PM
I tend to agree that Romney can’t even be seen as a Libertarian candidate.
I don’t care what kind of health care plan he created while governor; ANY state-run health care has to be anathema to the libertarian mind, no?
I guess you can say, “Well, I think libertarianism is thus-and-so,” but then we can all play that game, and nothing gets done.
The appeal of libertarianism, to me, is the philosophical purity of its platform. And socialized healthcare (in ANY form) is antithetical to the philosophical basis of the Libertarian movement.
So how can Romney be a candidate for a Libertarian? I ask this sincerely.
Scott H on July 13, 2009 at 6:54 PM
You are obviously ignorant about Libertarians. We were here long before Ron Paul and will be here long after.
But I will say this..Ron Paul knows more about economics than you ever will.
guntotinglibertarian on July 13, 2009 at 6:54 PM
Sarah a libertarian? LoL
She has proposed raising taxes.
PrezHussein on July 13, 2009 at 6:54 PM
I don’t have to go off bloomberg. I was there… and it is a windfall tax. Do you know what that is?
It rises and falls with the oil stock. So when the oil is low.. they don’t pay as much for oil. Also, all the oil companies were ok with this and signed the contract. WHOA!
gun… you are f*cking stupid BTW! I am an Alaska… DOH!
upinak on July 13, 2009 at 6:54 PM
I think people are reading way too much into Palin’s statement that she would campaign for conservatives, even if they’re independents or Democrats. When people say, “conservative Democrat,” they generally mean, “conservative compared to most Democrats.” I imagine Palin would only campaign for a truly conservative Democrat. Even then, I doubt most would ask her to campaign for them.
But we have people who are getting carried away into writing headlines that Palin will campaign for conservative Democrats, even though that’s an obviously hypothetical statement. Until you find an actual example of a Democrat who a) is truly conservative, and b)would ask Palin to campaign for him or her, it’s just a statement that she’s willing to do it under the right circumstances.
Rush did speculate about a third party, but to his credit, he said it was a remote possibility, and said that he made no claim to know what Palin is thinking. So for Rush, it’s an idle speculation, not a prediction
tom on July 13, 2009 at 6:55 PM
He is the leader of the Libertarian movement Oh Wise One. You know, the one your toting you gun with.
portlandon on July 13, 2009 at 6:56 PM
What is all this obsession with Romney? He has nothing to do with Libertarianism…he is a moderate Republican, period.
Libertarians believe in the Constitution, small government,low taxes, true federalism and maximum individual freedom. Period. We don’t care about Romney or Ron Paul or even Sarah Palin. We care about principles and vote accordingly.
How feaking hard is that to understand?
guntotinglibertarian on July 13, 2009 at 6:57 PM
I would think that Inhofe would also be… acceptable to a Libertarian.
Also, in the ‘well-read’ list, I hope you realize that Ayn Rand vehemently denied a part of any political party, explicitly including the Libertarians.
As well, while you make a good list of Conservative reading, being considered ‘well read’ is so much more than just that. I would think that a thorough reading of the classics would be required for that.
Scott H on July 13, 2009 at 6:57 PM
Romney should run as a federalist candidate. Federalism needs to be in the public eye
PrezHussein on July 13, 2009 at 6:58 PM
oh and gun.. ask sapwolf, ask port.. ask anyone on here.
I don’t lie about the issue of Alaska. I have never lied about Palina nd was one of the few who first brought her into the spot light.
As I said, I have proven myself on this blog a LONG time ago.
How about you stuff that in your pipe and smoke it. As for now on, I am done with your trifling trollish a$$ as you are as ignorant as all liberal talking about her.
*sighs*
upinak on July 13, 2009 at 6:58 PM
No, he isn’t. The candidate was Bob Barr…and total retard who hi-jacked the nomination.
Paul holds a number of Libertarian beliefs, but so what? Just because you call yourself a Republican doesn’t mean I can assume you “follow” Susan Collins. Get a grip.
guntotinglibertarian on July 13, 2009 at 6:58 PM
@guntotinglibertarian
Dude – are you on a bender?
Is it nearer to the beginning or the end?
My God man, take a break.
connertown on July 13, 2009 at 6:59 PM
I figured it must have been that. But I think the poll results are useless for that purpose, because I think a lot of people did like me: looked at the results, and said to themselves, “That’s not happening, anyway.”
So whatever results the poll turns up will probably be meaningless.
tom on July 13, 2009 at 6:59 PM
What was the question again? lol
guntotinglibertarian on July 13, 2009 at 6:59 PM
Guntote: I am well aware of what Libertarians stand for, as I thought my post showed. That was why I was puzzled regarding the mentioning of Romney. My apologies if I misunderstood the conversation.
However, as a self-professed libertarian, why are you against Sarah Palin, as she is a self-professed conservative (and not a libertarian) and thus not on your political radar at all?
Scott H on July 13, 2009 at 7:00 PM
So..she raised taxes on oil companies, right? Proof provided. Your apology accepted.
guntotinglibertarian on July 13, 2009 at 7:00 PM
Start eating. I heard she’s already read Hayek’s “Road to Serfdom”.
She sure preaches like she has.
In fact, she is one of the few who actually referred to what Obama is doing as “immoral” with regards to the growth of government.
She is the ONLY national political person who has done that.
Has Romney done that? No, because he lacks courage.
Sarah is brave and pointed it out.
I don’t care what books you’ve read if you are pointing out the immorality of growing the federal government as Obama is doing.
She’s got it down. She don’t need more reading on that. She needs to start writing it down and having it put on the WSJ or other places.
Sapwolf on July 13, 2009 at 7:02 PM
I am not “against” Sarah Palin. My wife and I contributed $4,800 to
McCain/Palin.But I have since developed reservations about her depth of knowledge, her lack of intellectual capacity and…most of all..her ability to win in a general election.
As I previously stated, were she the Republican nominee, I would vote for her. But I don’t think she can win…and we cannot afford to lose next time around.
guntotinglibertarian on July 13, 2009 at 7:03 PM
As I previously stated, were she the Republican nominee, I would vote for her. But I don’t think she can win…and we cannot afford to lose next time around.
guntotinglibertarian on July 13, 2009 at 7:03 PM
Well, geez, man…why didn’t you say that in the first place.
We certainly all agree on the final clause.
connertown on July 13, 2009 at 7:04 PM
guntotinglosertarian -
Since you support them, perhaps you might wish to learn to correctly spell the names of Jim DeMint and Michele Bachmann. And do you mean Lynne Cheney or Liz Cheney?
No offense, but you hardly seem like the sharpest knife in the drawer.
bw222 on July 13, 2009 at 7:05 PM
Many times, it IS an either-or proposition. As per my previous statement:
My post was an assuming arguendo post. And I’ll take common sense alone, anyday.
OhEssYouCowboys on July 13, 2009 at 7:06 PM
Upinak, can you believe this fool? Broken Record-o-rama.
portlandon on July 13, 2009 at 7:06 PM
My only objection to that is that we can’t simply “invent” a candidate that can win. Gotta play the hand we’re dealt.
Palin is the only possible winning hand I see at this point. Granted, it requires a lot to fall into place. But it’s WAY TOO EARLY to count out the ‘Cuda.
connertown on July 13, 2009 at 7:07 PM
upinak. A legend in its own lunch time. Laughable. What do you want, a friggin’ medal?
Grow Fins on July 13, 2009 at 7:07 PM
I called it out earlier on the thread. LOL, people are just dense.
upinak on July 13, 2009 at 7:07 PM
Thanks, but wouldn’t it be easier to just attack me as a Romney-loving, troll…in CAPS?
It amuses me that I am being simultaenously attacked as a Romney troll and a Paul cultist.
It scares me that we can’t have a lucid dialogue about Sarah Palin without hurling vitriol.
guntotinglibertarian on July 13, 2009 at 7:07 PM
I don’t think the usual suspects can win, either.
littleguy on July 13, 2009 at 7:07 PM
No, no!! I’m the legend! I’m the legend!
What was the question again?
guntotinglibertarian on July 13, 2009 at 7:08 PM
Good Lord, did you puke on a peice of posterboard for that POS on you added your name? Ugh, chill out on the cranberry liquor will ya!
upinak on July 13, 2009 at 7:09 PM
You may be right. That’s why my money goes to Michele Bachmann. And to Rudy, if he gets serious this time.
guntotinglibertarian on July 13, 2009 at 7:09 PM
Will this wind…be so mighty…as to lay low….the mountains…of the earthhhh….
connertown on July 13, 2009 at 7:09 PM
Libertarians believe in the Constitution, small government,low taxes, true federalism and maximum individual freedom. Period. We don’t care about Romney or Ron Paul or even Sarah Palin. We care about principles and vote accordingly.
How feaking hard is that to understand?
guntotinglibertarian on July 13, 2009 at 6:57 PM
Sapwolf on July 13, 2009 at 7:10 PM
Come on. Reagan didn’t come across as some egghead intellectual. I don’t know if he was actually as well-read as your ideal would be, anyway. Everyone is a little more sanctified in retrospect. I do know that he had the “amiable dunce” label.
Look, if Palin’s main sin is that she hasn’t read Hayek and Rand, I don’t think your field of prospective candidates is going to be very large. There’s stupidity, there’s ignorance, and there’s pretentiousness. It doesn’t take a Ph.D. to understand conservative principles.
ddrintn on July 13, 2009 at 7:10 PM
They can win… because?
littleguy on July 13, 2009 at 7:11 PM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 … 4 5 6 7 8 … 10 Next »