Grover Norquist: Sarah Palin for President 2012 Looks Unlikely

It is difficult to watch mainstream conservatives and Republicans defend Sarah Palin. As a woman and a true conservative, I take the time to study the issues (example) reading the WSJ, Politico, War Journal or watching CNBC and FOX Business News among others.

But it looks like the tides are about to turn such as this article here.

Last week Bill O’Reilly stated on Good Morning America that Palin “needs to go to college”. Perhaps O’Reilly did not know that she attended 6, before graduating.

In an interview to a Florida TV Station, Jeb Bush stated that he does not think that Palin is qualified, neither does Dick Cheney. If you saw his interview on “This Week on ABC”, Cheney’s facial expression belied more than his words.

Tom Tancredo in an interview this week stated that he thinks Palin is not presidential material. Tancredo also states that Juan McCain’s temper was not suited for the office.

In another article this week, the WSJ is making a correct comparison between Palin and the Reverend Jesse Jackson (a la Rush Limbaugh).

To be a Presidential candidate, a person must bring unity to the party. Thus far, as with everything in Palin’s past, she has divided the Alaska Republicans and Democrats, the McCain campaign staff, the GOP, the Tea Party Movement (with calls for joining the GOP, and recently she attempted to do the same within News Corp between the entertainment divisions by forcing a fight with a cartoon.

This week, Palin and her brood of 20 hangerson flooded the hollywood Oscar festivities (which has complained about) and hijacked free gifts "like locusts". He made a swell comedian on Jay Leno, then made the hollywood rounds to pitch a reality show; I am thinking of VHI's Daisy of Love or Tool Academy at this point.

Like I did in 2008, if Palin is the GOP nominee in 2012, I will avoid the polls. On Tuesday March 2nd, as I vote in the primaries, I will be voting against GOP candidates that she supports. It is the only way to save the GOP from itself and Palin.

Gone_Rogue of OK 2:49PM March 09, 2010

In his tea party speech, Tom Tancredo (with whom I support on immigration issues) called for “civics tests” for voters. Mr. Tancredo’s speech preceded Ms. Palin’s speech.

In her Tea Party Convention speech, Sarah from Alaska uttered the word [Constitution] about 2 dozen times.

The Sunday after her speech in an interview with Chris Wallace on FOX News Sunday, Palin called for Obama to “play the war card” by “declaring war with Iran.” [Sarah Palin]

That following Tuesday, a headline in the Dallas Morning News, Palin called for Texas to secede from the Union.

Had Sarah Palin bothered to take a 3rd grade civics class, she might have known that as per the US Constitution which she champions, only Congress “shall” declare war. I will not discuss the global implications of her statements.

Palin might also have known, that recently, when the question of Texas’ secession was posed to the US Supreme Court, Justice Scalia noted in a letter, that the issue had been settled during the Civil War. Palin should have taken into consideration that secession in Texas would mean the following:

1. Loss of all military bases and jobs

2. Loss of world class hospitals

3. Loss of our border

4. Loss of Federal Agencies such as the FAA, Homeland Security, Immigration Enforcement, hence creating open borders for Bin Laden and the Islam terrorists to enter this country.

5. Loss of state universities and top notch research facilities.

6. Loss of the military contractors, major oil and nuclear energy sectors.

7. Loss of regulations against medicines, environmental safe guards, air safety, drug enforcement, etc.

The list is too long, but the result would be the creation of a new unsecure banana republic at US’ gate. It would mean a loss of millions of jobs, new import fees for businesses.

And what might have called the leader of this new banana republic? El Presidante Palin?

Gone_Rogue of OK 2:32PM March 09, 2010

I am less sure than Grover Norquist that she does not intend to run but she may be weighing whether to run in 2012 or 2016. Is she going about either possibility in the right way? She has more faith in and appeal for hard-core conservatives than for GOP presidential-candidate-makers and their careful political calibration. There is enough evidence to suggest that she is making a serious attempt to overcome gaps in her knowledge which a presidential campaign is very likely to bring to the surface. The real difference may be between those voters who consider those gaps a fatal flaw and those who do not mind those gaps or think that advisers can fill her in or that she will learn or has been learning quickly.

Candadai Tirumalai of VA 9:27AM March 09, 2010

No harm no foul. I certainly did not intend to besmerch your comment. I could have said what I wanted to say in a much different way. I apologize. Having said that, I still don't trust the Huffington post as an authoritative news source. It tends to be water carrier for the progressive liberal agenda.

David of ID 4:52PM March 05, 2010